Soil Erodibility and Processes of Water Erosion On Hillslope

Geomorphology 32 Ž2000.
385–415
Soil erodibility and processes of water erosion on hillslope

Rorke B. Bryan )
Soil Erosion Laboratory, Faculty of Forestry, UniÕersity of Toronto, 33 Wilcocks Street, Scarborough, Ontario, Canada M5S 3B3
Received 1 June 1998; received in revised form 1 June 1999; accepted 17 August 1999
Abstract
The importance of the inherent resistance of soil to erosional processes, or soil erodibility, is generally recognized in
hillslope and fluvial geomorphology, but the full implications of the dynamic soil properties that affect erodibility are seldom
considered. In Canada, a wide spectrum of soils and erosional processes has stimulated much research related to soil
erodibility. This paper aims to place this work in an international framework of research on water erosion processes, and to
identify critical emerging research questions. It focuses particularly on experimental research on rill and interrill erosion
using simulated rainfall and recently developed techniques that provide data at appropriate temporal and spatial scales,
essential for event-based soil erosion prediction. Results show that many components of erosional response, such as
partitioning between rill and interrill or surface and subsurface processes, threshold hydraulic conditions for rill incision, rill
network configuration and hillslope sediment delivery, are strongly affected by spatially variable and temporally dynamic
soil properties. This agrees with other recent studies, but contrasts markedly with long-held concepts of soil credibility as an
essentially constant property for any soil type. Properties that determine erodibility, such as soil aggregation and shear
strength, are strongly affected by climatic factors such as rainfall distribution and frost action, and show systematic seasonal
variation. They can also change significantly over much shorter time scales with subtle variations in soil water conditions,
organic composition, microbiological activity, age-hardening and the structural effect of applied stresses. Property changes
between and during rainstorms can dramatically affect the incidence and intensity of rill and interrill erosion and, therefore,
both short and long-term hillslope erosional response. Similar property changes, linked to climatic conditions, may also
significantly influence the stability and resilience of plant species and vegetation systems. Full understanding of such
changes is essential if current event-based soil erosion models such as WEPP and EUROSEM are to attain their full potential
predictive precision. The complexity of the interacting processes involved may, however, ultimately make stochastic
modelling more effective than physically based modelling in predicting hillslope response to erodibility dynamics. q 2000
Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: soil; erodibility; water erosion
1. Introduction central Importance in geomorphology. In soil-man-

tled parts of the world, the geomorphic and hydro-
Transport of sediment from hillslopes to valleys
logic processes involved in hillslope sediment trans-
where it is accessible to fluvial processes is of
port are strongly influenced by soil properties. This
influence has been recognized in principle Že.g.,
)
Fax: q1-416-978-3834. Chorley, 1959., but in practice, the effect of the
E-mail address: r.bryan@utoronto.ca ŽR.B. Bryan.. dynamic complexity of surface soil properties on
0169-555Xr00r$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 6 9 - 5 5 5 X Ž 9 9 . 0 0 1 0 5 - 1
386 R.B. Bryanr Geomorphology 32 (2000) 385–415
hillslope sediment delivery processes has been largely ‘‘grey box’’ variable, at best, which may integrate
ignored by geomorphologists. More attention has the effects of process: property interactions through-
been paid in mass wasting studies using soil engi- out the plot, or only those active near the sediment
neering techniques, but these usually involve sub- collection trough. Study methods have frequently
soils with significantly less complex properties. Many excluded or suppressed processes active on natural
erosion studies by agricultural engineers have stud- hillslopes, or even on agricultural land. The small
ied true, ‘‘pedogenic’’ surface soils, but have con- plots used in many studies ŽBryan, 1991. often pre-
centrated on disturbed, homogenized ‘‘agricultural’’ clude rill development, which is particularly impor-
soils and gentle slopes where some properties and tant as erosion rates usually increase after rill inci-
processes of importance in geomorphology and hy- sion, significantly affecting erodibility ranking.
drology are suppressed. A second problem is that most of the detailed soil
Many erosional processes are active on hillslopes, erosion information comes from studies on agricul-
but in this paper, we focus exclusively on those tural soils, where natural soil profile features have
involving rainsplash and runoff. Bennett Ž1926. initi- been homogenized, macroporosity largely obliter-
ated research on soil properties related to erosion ated, and new features such as plough pans created.
resistance in Cuba, but Middleton Ž1930. formalized Such disturbance changes water partitioning and hy-
the erodibility concept, proposing two indices of soil drologic response during storm events, and alters the
erodibility combining properties affecting runoff and recurrence frequency of some erosion processes.
particle detachability, linked to field behaviour of Hortonian overland flow and related erosion pro-
soils in Carolina. Over the next fifty years, many cesses, for example, are exaggerated on agricultural
studies Žreviewed by Smith and Wischmeier, 1962; erosion plots, while subsurface processes tend to be
Bryan, 1968, 1991; De Ploey and Poesen, 1985; suppressed. Prolonged agricultural disturbance also
¨
Romkens, 1985; Morgan, 1986; Lal, 1990. tested, changes soil structure and organic content, often
refined, modified or replaced these indices in an significantly reducing soil resistance. The limitations
elusive search for consistent, universally applicable of small runoff plots for hydrologic prediction are
indices of erodibility. These studies have been useful well known, and it is somewhat surprising that the
in agricultural land management, but have provided comparable limitations of the use of agricultural soils
limited insight on geomorphologic or hydrologic to predict natural soil behaviour have not been equally
problems. The object of the present paper is to widely recognized.
review concepts of soil erodibility in the light of The third problem is temporal variability of the
recent research, particularly in Canada, to examine soil properties which control erodibility. Soil erodi-
why the available information has not been more bility was originally thought to be controlled by
useful in geomorphology and hydrology, and to iden- properties such as texture Že.g., Middleton, 1930;
tify important directions for future research. Bouyoucos, 1935. which change slowly, so that soil
Several obstacles restrict application of soil erodi- erodibility would remain essentially constant for a
bility information to problems of sediment transport given soil. In fact, the properties that dominate ero-
and slope development. The distribution of erosive sional response, such as aggregation and shear
forces and soil resistance differs for each of the strength, are highly dynamic, changing over short
sub-process active on hillslopes, and soil erodibility and long-term cycles of varying magnitude and pre-
can be defined only in relation to specific processes. dictability. This has often been recognized, but the
Few studies clearly define the processes active or implications for soil erodibility prediction generally
their temporal and spatial variation. In many cases, have not.
study methodology precludes precise process exami- Difficulties experienced in applying available soil
nation. In the plot studies which led to the Universal erodibility information to prediction of erosion on
Soil Loss Equation, for example, the soil erodibility natural hillslopes, or even on agricultural lands, have
Ž‘‘K ’’. factor was inferred from soil loss measured lead to a search for more explicit physically based
at the end of a 22-in. long erosion plot, rather than understanding of erosional processes, which has
by direct observation. The K factor is therefore a dominated soil erosion research over the past thirty
R.B. Bryanr Geomorphology 32 (2000) 385–415 387
years. While this has produced major advances in occurs in three stages ŽYariv, 1976.. On dry, loose
understanding of erosion processes, formidable re- soils, much energy is expended in particle disruption
search questions still remain. or deformation, but as soil water increases, shear
strength drops, the soil becomes fluidized, and in-
creasingly vulnerable to entrainment. The final stage
2. Water erosion processes on hillslopes follows ponding, as rainsplash starts to interact with
overland flow. The effect of a surface water layer on
Soil erodibility can be defined only in relation to splash detachment is controversial, Palmer Ž1963.
specific erosion processes and erosive forces, so and Mutchler and Larson Ž1971. reported increased
discussion of critical process characteristics is essen- detachment up to a threshold depth approximately
tial in understanding the effect of the dynamics of equal to the median raindrop diameter Ž d ., but other
related soil properties. Rainsplash and runoff energy workers have found little increase with layers up to
are the active erosive agents and if gully erosion, 3d in depth, followed by marked decrease ŽMoss and
which often involves complex regional geomorphic Green, 1983; Kinnell, 1990.. Microtopographic
factors, is excluded Žas it is from this paper., they roughness is sufficient on most slopes to produce
produce five more or less distinct sub-processes: discontinuous ponding and to suppress splash en-
splash erosion, sheetwash, rainflow, rill erosion and trainment, but enhance particle transport in rainflow
piping or tunnel erosion. Each can act in isolation, erosion. Raindrop impact also affects erosion pro-
but all are commonly active on hillslopes, either cesses by modifying flow hydraulics, as discussed
sequentially or simultaneously. These sub-processes below.
can be classified in various ways, but for geomorphic The importance of rainsplash energy has been
purposes the most useful distinction is between in- confirmed by many empirical studies Že.g., Young
terrill processes in which entrainment is primarily and Weirsma, 1973., and is reflected by the domi-
caused by rainsplash energy, and rill erosion or nant role assigned to rainfall erosivity in most soil
piping, in which it is caused by runoff. erosion models. This can result in underprediction of
soil erosion rates in areas where high-energy rainfall
2.1. Interrill processes is rare, but overland flow is still frequent, as shown
by De Ploey Ž1972. in Belgium and Bryan Ž1981. in
Splash erosion is driven by rainsplash kinetic Tanzania. Drop size has traditionally been measured
energy, which depends on raindrop characteristics by ‘‘flour tray’’ or stain methods Že.g., Laws, 1941;
Žmass and impact velocity; KE s 1r2 mÕ 2 . closely Laws and Parsons, 1943.. However, recent studies in
linked to rainfall type and intensity. Effective avail- Canada Že.g., Sheppard and Joe, 1994. with more
ability of this energy depends on soil conditions, precise drop measurement by particulate measure-
some is expended in deformation, wetting and dis- ment spectrometers, disdrometers and doppler radar,
ruption of soil particles, while the remainder is con- indicate that these early studies overestimated natural
verted to a reactive force acting upwards and away raindrop size, and therefore rainsplash energy. Nev-
from the point of impact. The distribution of these ertheless, rainsplash energy is an important erosive
forces has been analysed by, e.g., Rose Ž1960., De agent in splash and rainflow erosion which, by modi-
Ploey and Savat Ž1968., Ghadiri and Payne Ž1981., fying soil surface properties and flow hydraulics, can
Poesen and Savat Ž1981., Savat and Poesen Ž1981. strongly influence interrill and rill processes.
and Park et al. Ž1982.. The reactive force, which can Shallow interrill flow has little entrainment capac-
entrain and transport soil particles, depends on rain- ity without raindrop impact, but runoff energy is
fall characteristics, as modified by wind and canopy critical for transport in sheetwash and rainflow.
disturbance, and on soil water conditions. Wind dis- Runoff energy reflects flow discharge and hy-
turbance can increase impact velocity and change draulics, which are strongly influenced by soil sur-
impact angle, while canopy disturbance alters drop face properties, microtopography and vegetation, and
size spectra and impact velocities. Soil water is an are therefore highly variable. These interactions are
important control and the splash process typically vital in physical definition and modelling of runoff
erosion processes, and have been intensively studied. tion varies with soil characteristics. Fig. 1 shows
Studies of the applicability of deep channel hydraulic data from simulated rainfall flume experiments in the
relationships to overland flow Že.g., Horton et al., University of Toronto Soil Erosion Laboratory; the
1934; Emmett, 1970; Phelps, 1975; Savat, 1977. well-aggregated Gobles silt loam Žfrom S.W. On-
have found significant differences. Deep channel tario, Canada. shows a clear positive trend above Re
flow is usually subcritical, hydraulically smooth and values around 5000, but the more erodible Swinton
turbulent, with perimeter roughness elements entirely silt loam Žfrom Saskatchewan, Canada. shows no
submerged by the viscous sub-layer. Overland flow,
usually on significantly steeper slopes, is much thin-
ner and often discontinuous, with depths that can
vary by an order of magnitude over a few centime-
ters. Flow is frequently supercritical and conditions
can vary between fully rough, transitional and hy-
draulically smooth over very short distances, as
roughness elements often penetrate the viscous sub-
layer, or the complete flow. Rainsplash energy has
little effect on deep channel flow, but can strongly
influence shallow flow hydraulics.
While the hydraulic conditions of overland flow
determine the erosive forces acting on the soil, soil
properties can also modify these conditions, most
notably through their influence on surface roughness.
Roughness relationships in overland flow are com-
plex, and relative roughness Žroughness element
height:flow depth. is usually large. Hydraulic condi-
tions vary significantly over short distances with
changes in flow depth, or surface alteration during
and between flow events. Both can be strongly af-
fected by, for example, selective disintegration and
transport of soil aggregates, differential swelling of
clay minerals, surface sealing and crusting, and des-
iccation cracking. When roughness elements are fully
submerged, hydraulic roughness declines with flow
depth Žshown by an inverse relationship between the
Darcy–Weisbach friction factor Žff s 8 gRSru 2 . and
flow Reynolds number Ž Re s 4 uRrÕ . Že.g., Savat,
1980, Gilley et al., 1990., with the relationship slope
depending on flow regime. Flow resistance can be
partitioned into grain and form components but in
hydraulically smooth flow, grain resistance is domi-
nant. When roughness elements equal or exceed flow
depth, the ff: Re relationship becomes positive or
convex ŽAbrahams et al., 1986; Abrahams and Par-
sons, 1991; Nearing et al., 1998., the significance of
grain resistance declines Žoften to - 10% of total
Fig. 1. ŽA. Relationships between Reynolds number and Darcy–
resistance. ŽGovers and Rauws, 1986; Rauws, 1988; Weisbach friction factor for the Gobles silt loam. ŽB. Relation-
Abrahams et al., 1996., and sediment movement is ships between Reynolds number and Darcy–Weisbach friction
controlled by form resistance. However, the transi- factor for the Swinton silt loam.
similar trend with Re values up to 10000. The clay Parsons et al., 1990.. A clear exception to this
fraction of the chernozemic Swinton soil is domi- generalization is the incidence of cyclic scouring or
nated by smectite, and when the soil is saturated rilling, where there is no systematic downslope in-
unstable, low-density aggregates disintegrate easily, crease in flow depth. This has been demonstrated in
leaving a smooth surface with few protrusions. Form several experimental flume studies at the University
resistance may be influenced by large stable aggre- of Toronto Soil Erosion Laboratory ŽBryan and Poe-
gates, as on the Gobles soil, and also by stones, sen, 1989; Bryan and Oostwoud Wijdenes, 1992.. In
microtopographic roughness, scour features and knick these experiments, cyclic scouring on a sealing soil
points, vegetation fragments, and by raindrop impact resulted in intermittent infiltration loss, limiting
disturbance. downslope increase in discharge. However, in other
The relationships described depend on surface experiments, Bryan and Brun Ž1999. have shown a
roughness and flow depth, and relate directly to soil similar effect, due to cyclic deposition of miniature
erodibility assessment. In hydraulically smooth flow, alluvial fans. These cyclic scour and rilling processes
sediment transport is controlled by grain shear stress are discussed further below.
ŽSinghal et al., 1980., and is resisted by the complete Hydraulic differences between interrill and rill
bed surface, but in hydraulically rough flow, shear flow not only reflect surface roughness:flow depth
stress is concentrated on, and resisted by roughness relationships, but also raindrop impact. Many studies
elements. In the example cited, the high erodibility have reported increased erosive capacity of shallow
of the Swinton soil results in hydraulically smooth interrill flow due to rainsplash Že.g., De Ploey, 1971;
conditions at higher Reynolds numbers than on the Walker et al., 1978; Kinnell, 1985; Guy et al., 1987;
resistant Gobles soil. On actual hillslopes, of course, Moss, 1988; Moss et al., 1979.. Interrill processes
conditions can vary greatly over very short distances, include a complex mixture of rainsplash, sheetwash
reflecting a complex interplay of factors. Flow depth and rainflow erosion, which varies spatially with
at any location reflects the balance between rainfall flow depth and temporally with variations in rainfall
rate, flow delivery from upslope and infiltration rate. intensity and raindrop size. The effect of raindrop
This changes continuously during storms, but depth disturbance on flow hydraulics is less clear. Yoon
generally increases with storm intensity and duration, and Wenzel Ž1971. and Shen and Li Ž1973. found
producing a systematic temporal change from hy- significant increase in flow depth and Darcy Weis-
draulically rough to smooth conditions. bach friction factors, but Smerdon Ž1964. and Savat
At any instance, a similar systematic spatial Ž1977. reported only modest changes, particularly on
change would be expected with downslope increase steeper slopes.
in flow depth. Interaction of other factors, such as
differences in infiltration characteristics, often re- 2.2. Rill erosion
lated to surface sealing can make this difficult to
demonstrate ŽBryan and Poesen, 1989., but it has The transition from interrill to rill processes is
been shown on rough, semi-arid hillslopes at Walnut critical both for erosion rates and the geomorphic
Gulch, AZ ŽAbrahams et al., 1989; Parsons et al., evolution of hillslopes. Interrill processes act inter-
1990.. Relative roughness at any location also varies mittently over most parts of the hillslope, and are
over time with changes in the soil surface, such as strongly influenced by rainsplash energy, while rill
sealing or crusting, hydrocompaction, swelling, se- processes are concentrated and not directly affected
lective erosion or deposition ŽSlattery and Bryan, by rainsplash. Because of the importance of the
1992a., but the most significant change is usually rill interrill:rill transition, many studies have examined
initiation. Conditions in interrill overland flow vary, threshold conditions for rill initiation ŽBryan, 1987.,
but most flows are hydraulically rough so that form though most have focused almost exclusively on
resistance dominates. Once flow concentrates into hydraulic conditions with little or no attention to the
rill channels many roughness elements are sub- influence of soil properties. Rill erosion involves
merged, and depth increases downchannel, produc- flow concentration, often caused on natural hillslopes
ing hydraulically smooth flow ŽGilley et al., 1990; by microtopography, vegetation, or animal tracking,
and on agricultural soils by tillage. The resulting rills soil particle transport, flow sediment concentrations
may be randomly or systematically distributed. Flow increased rapidly. The critical uU will depend on soil
concentration alone does not necessarily cause rill properties. The Belgian calcareous loess tested by
incision ŽEmmett, 1970; Dunne and Dietrich, 1980., Govers is exceptionally erodible; in comparative lab-
and if threshold hydraulic conditions are reached, is oratory tests of 12 soils from Canada, Belgium and
not an essential prerequisite. Some examination of Israel, Bryan and De Ploey Ž1983. found this soil to
hydraulic conditions is therefore a necessary basis be much less resistant than even erodible loess soils
for discussion of the role of soil properties. from Israel and from the Rocky Mountain foothills
Horton’s Ž1945. concept of drainage basin evolu- in Canada. Significantly higher threshold uU values
tion linked rill initiation to the threshold tractive have, for example, been reported for a range Cana-
force for particle entrainment and transportation, dian soils, by Bryan Ž1990., Slattery and Bryan
which depends on both flow conditions and soil Ž1992a. and Merz and Bryan Ž1993., including both
surface properties. This can occur in any flow, but sealing sandy loams and more aggregated clay-rich
the necessary flow depths are usually reached only in soils. In Fig. 2a, Govers’ uU :Os relationship is com-
concentrated flow. Many proposed hydraulic indices pared with experimental relationships established in
of rill initiation are related directly to critical tractive the University of Toronto Soil Erosion Laboratory
force. These include shear velocity ŽGovers, 1985., for the Gobles and Swinton silt foams, from Ontario
bed shear stress ŽChisci et al., 1985; Torri et al., and Saskatchewan, respectively. Even the Swinton
1987., stream power ŽRose, 1985., unit stream power soil, shown in flume experiments to be quite erodible
ŽGovers and Rauws, 1986; Moore and Burch, 1986., ŽBryan, 1996., shows a critical uU value signifi-
and either unit or total discharge ŽMeyer et al., cantly above Govers’ value, which appears to be a
1975.. Other authors have invoked moulding of mo- minimum for the least resistant soils.
bile beds by supercritical flow ŽSavat and De Ploey, Rose Ž1985. used stream power Ž w ., proposed as
1982; De Ploey, 1983; Bryan, 1990., or flow insta- a bedload formula by Bagnold Ž1960. and defined as
bility features ŽRauws, 1987., linked with roll waves the power per unit area of streambed, as an index for
ŽIshihara et al., 1953; Karcz and Kersey, 1980. or rill incision with a threshold value 0.5 W m2 . Near-
secondary flow cells ŽMoss et al., 1982; Merritt, ing et al. Ž1998. found w to be the most consistently
1984.. reliable indicator of unit sediment load across a
It is difficult to reconcile all results of the studies range of experimental conditions and soil types.
cited because of varied study conditions, including However, Govers and Rauws Ž1986. found unit
field plots and laboratory flumes of diverse design stream power Ž y ., proposed as a total load formula
and dimensions, slope gradient and slope shape, both by Yang Ž1973. and defined as power per unit
with and without rainfall. Not surprisingly, hydraulic weight of water, to be a good predictor of sediment
indicators, which are effective in some studies, prove concentration in thin flows on non-cohesive beds,
irrelevant in others. In many cases, information nec- with threshold values of 0.006–0.008 in. sy1 . Moore
essary to determine whether differences are real or and Burch Ž1986. also found that y fitted results
artifacts of experimental procedures is not available. from several experiments well and suggested a
Nevertheless, some general conclusions can be sug- threshold value of 0.002 m sy1 as a possible con-
gested. The most consistently useful hydraulic in- stant for many soils.
dices appear to shear velocity Ž uU s gRS 0.5 ., stream The studies cited indicate that uU , w and y are all
power Ž w s pqgS . and unit stream power Ž y s ru.. useful hydraulic indices for rill initiation, but data for
Govers Ž1985. identified a threshold uU value of the Gobles and Swinton silt loams in Fig. 2 support
0.03–0.035 m sy1 for calcareous loess in Belgium. the Govers and Rauws’ Ž1986. use of y as a pre-
Above this value, which Govers linked to a selective ferred index. The considerable scatter of data reflect
Fig. 2. Ža. Relationships between flow sediment concentration, shear velocity, stream power, and unit stream power ŽGobles silt loam.. Žb.
Relationships between flow sediment concentration, shear velocity, stream power, and unit stream power ŽSwinton silt loam..
some system variability, but also the difficulty of roll waves at Fr - 1, which can increase local bed
obtaining accurate hydraulic measurements in very shear stress by three- to fivefold ŽHorton, 1938.,
shallow flows and of identifying the initial stages of generate bed deformation and trigger rill incision.
rill incision. Another variable linked with rill initia- Bed deformation is usually associated with a most
tion is the Froude number Ž Fr s u r gR 0.5 . indicating cohesionless soils, such as highly erodible loess from
flow condition. Supercritical flows Ž Fr ) 1. are as- Belgium ŽSavat, 1976. or China ŽLuk et al., 1989..
sociated with flow instability features, such as stand- However, Hodges Ž1982. reported rill scouring
ing waves, which cause localized increase in bed caused by roll waves in smectite-rich depositional
shear stress. Fr values in rivers are usually - 1, but soils in Dinosaur Park Badlands, Alberta, and Bryan
supercritical flow is frequent in shallow flows. Sev- and Oostwoud Wijdenes Ž1992. observed similar
eral authors Že.g., Ishihara et al., 1953; Savat, 1976; features in field experiments on clay-rich lacustrine
Hodges, 1982; Bryan, 1990; Bryan and Oostwoud soils near Lake Baringo in northern Kenya. In these
Wijdenes, 1992. have reported standing waves and cases, soil cohesion apparently dropped below criti-
Fig. 3. Cyclic rill scour patterns in runon flume experiments on the PontypoolrPeel sandy loam Žafter Bryan and Brun, 1999..
cal levels due to high soil water contents. In virtually terns. Even in simple rill systems, intermittent stor-
all experiments where flow instability triggered rill age and remobilisation occurs, leading to cyclic rill
scouring test conditions produced positive soil water patterns, such as those shown in Fig. 3 developed in
potential for most of the test. More detailed examina- Bryan and Brun’s Ž1999. flume experiments. Bryan
tions of these conditions by Bryan and Rockwell and Poesen Ž1989. showed that such intermittent
Ž1998. are discussed below. scour and deposition can complicate hydrologic re-
The effect of hydraulic conditions on rill initiation sponse, as localised scour below erosional knick-
and has been extensively studied, and the hydraulic points produces short-term peaks in infiltration rates.
geometry of evolving rill networks has received some The dramatic effect of different soil conditions on
attention ŽSchumm, 1956; Kashiwaya, 1978; Rown- rill network configuration has been shown by experi-
tree, 1982; Schumm et al., 1987., but the impact of ments in the University of Toronto Soil Erosion
network geometry on sediment delivery has been Laboratory ŽFig. 4.. Fig. 4a shows limited network
almost entirely ignored. This is an important omis- development on a sealing soil by 2 h of intense
sion as entrained soil rarely moves directly to the rainfall, strongly influenced by subsurface moisture
outlet. As a result measurements at a terminal weir and seepage ŽBryan et al., 1998.. Fig. 4b shows a
may bear little relationship to upslope erosion pat- very different high-density network developed on the
Fig. 4. Ža. Rill network development on the PontypoolrPeel sandy loam after 120 min of simulated rainfall at 60 mm hy1 . ŽNote complete
flume measures 7.1 = 2.4 m. Transverse markers are at 1-m intervals.. Žb. Rill network development on the Gobles silt loam after 120 min
of simulated rainfall at 60 mm hy1 . ŽNote complete flume measures 7.1 = 2.4 m. Transverse markers are at 0.5-m intervals..
much more cohesive, resistant Gobles silt loam un- The applicability of data from the deep-channel
der similar rainfall conditions ŽBrunton and Bryan, confluence studies studies to rill-scale confluences
1999.. where the standing waves produced may greatly
The clear differences in rill network geometry exceed flow depth ŽFig. 5. is not clear. In one of the
with soil type, shown in Fig. 4 are of importance very few rill-scale studies available Mosley Ž1976.
because the potential for temporary sediment storage showed that tributary confluence angle and relative
within the rill system increases with the network discharge can strongly influence bed scour and depo-
complexity, reflecting the effect of confluence char- sition both at the confluence and downchannel. This
acteristics on local hydraulic conditions. Sediment study involved artificial sediments in a very low
transport patterns have received little attention in angle flume with run-on discharge. Brunton and
previous studies such as those of Schumm et al. Bryan Ž2000. studied a more natural rill system,
Ž1987., which focused primarily on rills as potential developed on Gobles silt loam in a 58 inclination
analogues for large river systems. Most work on the flume under simulated rainfall ŽFig. 4b., and com-
effect of confluences on sediment transport has been piled preliminary sediment budgets. These showed
carried out in large river channels Že.g., Best, 1988; marked, but very complex effects of confluence evo-
Roy and Bergeron, 1990; Roy et al., 1988., focusing lution on sediment storage patterns. Considerable
particularly on secondary flow circulation patterns further experimental work, with comparable data
Že.g., Rhoads and Kenworthy, 1998, 1999; Lane et from a wider range of soils is essential to establish a
al., 1999.. general model of the effect of rill network geometry
Fig. 5. Hydraulic disturbance and standing wave at artificial rill confluence in experiments at University of Toronto Soil Erosion Laboratory.
on hillslope sediment production, and the way in Descriptions of many piping systems have been
which this is linked to soil erodibility. The situation published, and linkages to soil properties such as
is complicated as rill system characteristics are often clay mineralogy, sodium adsorption ratio and ex-
ephemeral, changing significantly during individual changeable sodium percentage are well-established.
rainstorms. Dunne and Aubry Ž1986. described ex- Very few measurements of flow conditions or sedi-
pansion and contraction of rill system on sandy soils ment movement within systems are available. Bryan
at Amboseli, Kenya, in response to the balance and Harvey Ž1985. instrumented two large pipe sys-
between rill and interrill processes. Interrill erosion tems in the Dinosaur Badlands, Alberta, Canada.
was dominant in low and moderate intensity storms, While piping slightly delayed storm hydrograph
delivering more sediment to rills than could be evac- peaks, sediment and solute concentrations were sig-
uated, causing network shrinkage. In prolonged or nificantly higher than in surface ephemeral channels.
high intensity storms, rill evacuation exceeded inter- Bryan et al. Ž1978, 1983., in the same badlands, and
rill supply, and the network expanded. A detailed Yair et al. Ž1980. in the Zin Badlands in Israel,
sediment budget for a rill network can therefore found that sediment concentrations and hydrologic
provide a sensitive index of the influence of different response of micropipe flow was indistinguishable
soils on hillslope response to variations in storm from rill flow. However, Torri et al. Ž1994. found
conditions. that sediment concentrations in micropipe flow were
higher than in rills on clay biancane in Tuscany,
2.3. Pipe and tunnel erosion
Italy. Direct hydraulic measurements in micropipes
While research in soil erosion by water has con- are very scarce, but values in Table 1, measured in
centrated overwhelmingly on analysis of surface pro- adjacent rills and micropipes formed in flume experi-
cesses, subsurface erosion in pipes or tunnels has ments at the University of Toronto Soil Erosion
long been recognised as a significant agent in sedi- Laboratory ŽFig. 6. are very similar.
ment transport and hillslope development, particu- Few attempts have been made to analyze linkages
larly in dryland regions. Subsurface erosion is also between piping and rill initiation, except on sodic
very important in temperate mountainous peatlands smectites in badlands, where rills develop by col-
and in deep highly weathered humid tropical soils,
but several reviews ŽGilman and Newson, 1980;
Jones, 1981; Higgins and Coates, 1990; Bryan and Table 1
Jones, 1997. indicate that small-scale pipes or tun- Comparative hydraulic data for micropipe and rill channels, mea-
nels are probably almost as ubiquitous as rills. Piping sured in simulated rainfall flume experiments on a Canadina
develops spontaneously by outlet sapping where soil chernozem ŽSwinton silt loam.
Os : sediment concentration Žg ly1 ., uU : shear velocity Žcm sy1 .,
water potential is positive and high hydraulic gradi-
Re: Reynolds number, Fr: Froude number, ff: Darcy–Weisbach
ents produce seepage forces that can eject particles friction factor, w: stream power ŽW m2 ., y: shear velocity Žcm
and enlarge fabric macropores. Forces close to the sy1 ..
surface Žanalyzed in detail by Iverson and Major, Time Os u) Re Fr ff w y
1986; Howard and MacLane, 1988; Dunne, 1990. Rill
can usually eject only small particles from soils of 81 29.36 6.15 1555 0.989 0.498 1.179 1.502
low cohesion, so true piping is usually found only in 83 23.20 5.17 1054 1.125 0.385 0.705 1.438
saturated dispersed clays, loess and organic soils. 94 40.75 5.16 940 1.013 0.475 0.633 1.290
Tunnel erosion exploits existing large macropores 107 34.06 5.14 970 1.058 0.436 0.658 1.342
116 37.27 5.59 978 0.829 0.710 0.673 1.144
such as animal burrows, root channels and desicca-
tion cracks. These can occur in any soils, but are Micropipe
particularly common where swelling smectite clays 63 25.33 5.47 736 0.655 1.102 0.882 1.342
coincide with intense seasonal drying, and where soil 73 23.14 6.09 975 0.637 1.202 0.846 0.959
87 39.13 6.44 1262 0.700 0.996 1.091 1.112
chemistry favours dispersion. Piping and tunnelling 101 6.09 994 0.649 1.157 0.863 0.977
are physically distinct, but are often functionally 113 25.98 6.32 1202 0.705 0.980 1.079 1.100
indistinguishable, and are usually grouped as piping.
Fig. 6. Micropipes and rills formed in laboratory experiments on Swinton silt loam. Micropipes developed along interstorm desiccation
cracks.
Fig. 7. Rills and micropipes developed on marine clay biancana badlands in Val D’Orcia, Tuscany, Italy.
lapse of micropipes formed along desiccation cracks usually reflect short-term weather conditions. Bryan
ŽBryan et al., 1978; Hodges, 1982; Gerits et al., Ž1996. showed that both rills and micropipes could
1987.. Torri and Bryan Ž1997. found a very close develop on the Swinton silt loam chernozem ŽFig. 6.
interaction between rill development and micropip- depending on precise antecedent soil water condi-
ing on clay biancane in Tuscany ŽFig. 7., but this tions, and Govers Ž1987. also identified close links
piping was caused by soil dissolution due to capil- between rills and piping caused by mole burrows on
lary moisture diffusion, rather than positive soil wa- loess soils at Huldenberg, Belgium.
ter potentials. Until recently it was generally be-
lieved that vulnerability to rilling and piping is quite
3. Soil properties and soil erodibility
distinct, and the processes rarely coincide, except on
extreme badland soils. Recent studies suggest, how- The preceding review of rill, interrill and piping
ever, that close linkage is actually quite common on processes has identified numerous circumstances in
other soils, particularly when near-surface drainage which erosion incidence and intensity can be strongly
is impeded due to natural soil profile features or influenced by soil properties. Many studies have
artificial plough pan development. Recent experi- examined the effect of soil properties on erosion, but
mental studies at the University of Toronto Soil with a wide range of methodologies, soil types,
Erosion Laboratory which linked rill network devel- climatic conditions, and soil management histories,
opment to soil water conditions monitored by micro different properties have proven effective in different
time domain reflectometer probes ŽBryan et al., situations. Almost any soil property may influence
1998., have shown that both surface and subsurface erosion response, but, as Lal Ž1990. has pointed out,
processes simultaneously influenced rill initiation, no single, simple, measurable soil property can fully
and neither the processes nor their morphological represent the integrated response that constitutes soil
effects could be clearly separated. On field soils, erodibility. In practice, a few properties, particularly
partitioning between rill and pipe processes will soil aggregation, consistency and shear strength, usu-
ally dominate erosional response, and other proper- acteristics, and impact on soil water relations Že.g.,
ties are only indirectly effective. These properties McIntyre, 1958a,b; Farres, 1978; Moore, 1981;
collectively influence water movement, the distribu- Callebaut et al., 1985; Norton, 1987; Mualem et al.,
tion of erosive forces, and resistance to entrainment. ¨
1990; Romkens et al. 1990; Sumner and Stewart,
In most cases, the most important initial effect is on 1992; Valentin and Bresson, 1992; Le Bissonnais,
the way in which soils respond to rainfall. 1996; Assouline and Mualem, 1997.. It is impossible
to review all relevant studies comprehensively here,
3.1. Soil behaÕiour under rainfall but research on surface sealing has been notably
prominent in Canada, particularly on smectite-rich
Water movement into, through and over the soil is solonetzic and chernozemic soils developed over
of paramount importance in soil erosion. It encom- Cretaceous marine shales in western Alberta ŽBryan,
passes infiltration, percolation and retention. These 1973; Arshad and Mermut, 1988; Romkens ¨ et al.,
are largely controlled by the volume, size, distribu- 1995.. Despite differences in soil properties and
tion and continuity of pore space, and therefore, the experimental conditions, there is agreement about the
skeletal framework or geometric arrangement of tex- processes involved Žraindrop compaction, clay mi-
tural particles and aggregates. This framework is gration and filtration, vesicle formation, and, possi-
dynamic, changing at varying rates through physical bly, clay skin orientation., the impact on infiltration
and biochemical processes ŽHorn, 1988, 1994; Horn Žmarked decline., and linkage of sealing susceptibil-
et al., 1994.. Sometimes in undisturbed soils, textural ity to soil aggregation. Moss Ž1991. has described a
particles and aggregates exist in a non-coherent ‘‘seismic wave’’ effect as raindrops hit the surface
‘‘card-house’’ fabric, but most commonly they are causing collapse of pores, especially in silty soils.
joined by bonds of varying character and strength Unstable aggregates break down rapidly under rain-
into a coherent structure. The fabric of soils dis- splash and wetting stress, providing particles for seal
turbed by tillage, on the other hand, is often non- formation, resulting in ponding and runoff genera-
coherent. An important, and largely ignored, issue in tion. The degree of breakdown varies greatly with
soil erosion studies is the rate at which coherence is aggregate characteristics, but is also strongly influ-
reestablished. The reestablished, coherent fabric dif- enced by initial soil moisture conditions, typically
fers significantly from the non-coherent fabric, but being most rapid on dry soils ŽBryan, 1971a; Luk,
also from that of undisturbed soil. Coherence is not 1985; LeBissonnais, 1990, 1996; Loch and Foley,
synonymous with cohesion and the structure of cohe- 1994.. Slattery and Bryan Ž1992b. have described a
sive soils is typically non-coherent after disturbance. typical sequence of seal development from experi-
Transition from non-coherence to coherence, de- ments in the University of Toronto Soil Erosion
scribed as ‘‘welding’’ by Kwaad and Mucher Ž1994., Laboratory. Seal properties and formation rates vary
involves re-establishment of bonds, which can take with soil and rainfall characteristics, but they usually
place slowly between, or more rapidly during rain- form almost completely in the first 5–10 min of
storms. On most disturbed soils coherence develops rainfall when most loose particles are available.
quite quickly, but soils such as highly flocculated Virtually all studies of surface sealing have in-
calcareous soils or tropical oxisols or nitosols ŽAhn, volved disturbed soils, and the significance of seal-
1979., can remain non-coherent almost indefinitely. ing processes on undisturbed, coherent soils is largely
The complete soil profile affects water relation- unknown. Most studies have also used very small
ships and changes at depth due to swelling and soil samples, and so provide little information on the
shrinkage, dispersion, hydrocompaction and clay mi- spatial continuity of sealing on hillslopes or its ef-
gration, can affect erosional response. However, most fects on microtopography and flow hydraulics. It
attention has been focused on the effect of surface should also be noted that virtually all experimental
sealing or crusting on infiltration, ponding and runoff studies have taken place under high intensity rainfall,
generation. Many studies have examined seal struc- and the processes of soil sealing may be quite differ-
ture and micromorphology, formation processes and ent under low intensity rainfall, particularly on
rates, relationship to soil properties and rainfall char- swelling-clay soils. Because of its hydrologic impact,
sealing susceptibility is generally interpreted as a indices, and also their apparently erratic perfor-
direct measure of vulnerability to interrill erosion, mance. Many indices which have proved effective
but, in fact, the effect of a ponded layer on rain- relate to aggregation, either directly Že.g., Yoder,
splash entrainment is ambivalent and the increase in 1936; Adams et al., 1958; Rose, 1960; Bryan, 1969,
bed shear stress with flow depth can be offset by 1974; Luk, 1979., or through composite measures
increased seal strength. On a sandy loam soil from such as Middleton’s Ž1930. erosion and dispersion
southern Ontario, Canada, Slattery and Bryan Ž1992b. ratios, or Andre and Anderson’s Ž1961. surface-ag-
found that seal strength increased only during seal gregation ratio. In theory, one would expect aggrega-
formation in the initial minutes of a rainstorm, and tion to directly determine the resistance of disturbed,
peak splash entrainment actually coincided with peak non-coherent soils, but measures of soil strength or
soil strength. Bradford et al. Ž1986. also reported consistency to be more effective on coherent soils.
positive correlation between splash and soil strength. No single measure appears to be able to capture fully
However, different relationships can be expected on the complex evolution to a coherent fabric.
clay-rich soils, particularly when seal development is Simple compaction and interlocking due to me-
also influenced by runoff. chanical pressure can produce a coherent fabric, but
Most studies have not differentiated among seal usually aggregate disintegration and the development
types, but Arshad and Mermut Ž1988. separated in of new bonds between released textural particles or
situ disruptional seals, formed by raindrop com- aggregate fragments also occurs. This partially ex-
paction and filtration of fines, from depositional plains the complex behaviour of aggregate stability
seals caused by selective deposition, while Sumner as erodibility index. On the one hand, stable aggre-
Ž1995. identified four categories of seals or crusts: gates resist entrainment by flow or splash more
chemical crusts; structural crusts; depositional effectively, but they also obstruct the development of
crusts, and cryptogamic crusts. Surface roughness is coherence, which ultimately provides greater strength
often increased by structural sealing, with formation and resistance against the higher shear stresses gen-
of micro hoodoos and depressionsŽSlattery and erated in channel flow. Young Ž1974., for example,
Bryan, 1994; Helming et al., 1998., but is decreased found that soils with particularly high aggregate
by depositional sealing. Both structural and deposi- breakdown were resistant to rill incision. The ulti-
tional seals can occur on both interrills and rills, but mate effect on erosion rates will depend on the
because of the microtopographic amplitude Ž"5 relative resistance of the soil in coherent and non-
mm., the hydraulic impact is greatest on interrill coherent states, and on runoff hydraulics which de-
flow. Smooth depositional seals can establish critical termine partitioning between grain and form resis-
conditions for flow instability and rill scour, and play tance. The situation is complicated by the bonding
a key role in cyclic rilling ŽBryan and Oostwoud mechanisms, both those responsible for original ag-
Wijdenes, 1992; Bryan and Brun, 1999.. Bryan and gregates and those that form as the soil becomes
Hodges Ž1984. and Bryan et al. Ž1978. also showed coherent. These include electrostatic bonds between
that depositional seals play a critical role as the clay crystals, cation bridges, humic acids or metallic
initial loci for runoff and rill generation on smectite- humates, various microbial products, and water co-
rich mudstones in the Dinosaur Badlands, Alberta. hesion and surface tension bonds. Some bonds, in-
The change from non-coherence to coherence af- cluding those of metallic humates, develop slowly
fects entrainment resistance as well as soil hydrol- and resist change. Others, such as the electrostatic
ogy. On non-coherent surfaces, resistance to entrain- bonds between clay particles, are weaker, and can
ment by flow ŽHjulstrom, 1935. or splash ŽPoesen change rapidly with pore water electrolyte concentra-
and Savat, 1981. is determined by particle size and tion during rainstorms. It is useful to distinguish
mass. As coherence increases, individual particle between relatively strong long-term bonds that de-
properties become less important and entrainment is velop slowly, and dominate the aggregation and
resisted by the shear strength of the coherent soil structure of the original, undisturbed soil, and short-
fabric. Recognition of this transition helps to explain term weaker bonds, which can form very quickly and
the prominence of certain properties as erodibility dominate reestablishment of fabric coherence.
3.2. Aggregation ŽOades, 1993.. They may also be strongly cemented

by hydrous oxides and carbonates. The terms mi-
Aggregation is a particularly important factor in croaggregate and macroaggregate have been used
erosion resistance and sealing susceptibility of non- variably to identify the units described. In soil ero-
coherent soils. This presents some practical problems sion research, it is most useful to distinguish units up
in assessing soil erodibility. Aggregation is a com- to 250 mm diameter as microaggregates. These are
plex, composite property and there is no general tightly bonded dense particles of low porosity, dis-
agreement about the most significant aggregation tinct from the larger, loosely bonded macroaggre-
characteristics for soil erosion, or the most appropri- gates which incorporate microaggregates, stones, un-
ate analytical methods. Some appreciation of the protected organic debris and abundant pore space in
processes involved in aggregation processes is neces- low density units up to 10 mm or more in diameter.
sary to understand the problem. A number of good The splash and runoff entrainment relationships
comprehensive reviews are available Že.g., Harris et presented by Hjulstrom Ž1935. and Poesen Ž1981.
al., 1966; Tisdall and Oades, 1982; Swift, 1991; would indicate aggregate size as the characteristic of
Waters and Oades, 1991; Tisdall, 1994., so these are most importance in erosion. However, these relation-
summarized very briefly. ships were developed with material of uniform spe-
Aggregate formation involves physical stresses, cific gravity where size and mass are directly related,
which can force particles together, or apart, and and more complex relationships would be expected
binding agents, which cement particles with varying for composite heterogeneous aggregates. Preferential
strength. Physical stresses include frost action, root entrainment of large aggregates of low specific grav-
action, compaction and shrinkage. Binding agents ity appears particularly common in shallow, hy-
include humic acids, microbial muscilages, organic draulically rough flows ŽFarenhorst and Bryan, 1995..
metallic compounds, mineral deposits and various In flume experiments at the University of Toronto
electrostatic bonds related to clay crystalline struc- Soil Erosion Laboratory, Bryan and Brun Ž1999.
ture, diffuse double layer charges, moisture content found that large aggregates move preferentially in
and electrolyte concentration ŽGerits et al., 1990.. shallow flows, and play a critical role in initiating
Aggregation represents the integrated response to all cyclic deposition. In any case, aggregates vary greatly
the complex, dynamic interactions between these in stability, both between soils and within the same
stresses and binding agents. soil, so aggregation properties measured on isolated
It is now generally accepted that soil aggregation samples do not necessarily characterize accurately
involves a hierarchy of particle sizes characterised the material affected by erosive stress. Aggregate
by different structure and bonding agents ŽTisdall stability is a complex property and measured resis-
and Oades, 1982; Oades and Waters, 1991.. This tance, rate of disintegration and character of break-
model, in which organic matter is critical, applies to down products all vary with methods of analysis and
all soils except those of the humid tropics where iron particularly the methods of wetting used.
and aluminum oxides dominate. The basic blocks are Imeson and Vis Ž1984a. and Loch Ž1994., among
clay platelets, bonded by aluminosilicates and or- many others, have comprehensively reviewed meth-
ganic polymers in units up to 0.2 mm diameter. ods of aggregate stability analysis. Aggregate stabil-
These units bond around organic kernels of micro- ity is defined by the balance between applied stress
bial debris and persistent polysaccharides to form and material resistance. As moisture content affects
extremely stable, resistant aggregates ranging up to both, measured values are strongly influenced by
90 mm diameter. Larger aggregates up to 200 mm antecedent moisture and wetting conditions. It is
diameter combine these units with clay flocs, and therefore important to attempt to match the method
sand and silt particles around stable cores of plant used with the specific erosion processes active. On
debris, which are physically shielded from decompo- wetting, aggregates are stressed by pore air compres-
sition. These in turn are bound into aggregates up to sion Žslaking., differential swelling of components
250 mm diameter by roots, fungal hyphae and tran- and rainsplash energy. All reach peak intensity and
sient organic matter acting as a ‘‘sticky string bag’’ produce maximum breakdown when rain falls on dry
soil ŽPanabooke and Quirk, 1957; Le Bissonais et al., comparative tests of the erodibility of Canadian,
1989.. As water content increases, some aggregate Belgian and Israeli soils.
bonds, such as cohesion between clays diminish, and Soil shear strength appears to be the most impor-
aggregate strength declines. However, slaking and tant control on the entrainment resistance of coherent
swelling stresses are also reduced, so intense rainfall soils, but it is difficult to obtain useful measurements
on moist soils tends to cause plastic deformation and for the portion of the soil directly affected by erosive
compaction rather than aggregate rupture. The pre- forces. Soil shear strength is a measure of resistance
cise process balance varies with antecedent moisture, to failure under applied force, and is defined by the
rainfall intensity, and the proportions of micro- and Coulomb equation as:
macroaggregates. Loosely bound macroaggregates
t s c q z tan f
tend to disintegrate fairly quickly under wetting
stresses, but the constituent microaggregates are The active components in resistance are cohesion
much more resistant, and will determine the nature Ž c ., the summation of the effect of all the bonding
of surface sealing and welding processes and there- agents effects discussed, and internal friction Ž f .,
fore effective erodibility. It should be noted that which integrates both surface and interlocking fric-
while aggregate size and stability are important in- tion. Both are affected by soil moisture content and
fluences on erosional response, aggregate shape and pore pressure conditions, and f is also determined
size heterogeneity, which also influence pore space by the normal stress Ž z . or overburden pressure. Soil
geometry in the evolving soil fabric, and surface strength is therefore not a unique property, but varies
roughness in shallow flows, have seldom been con- with position in the soil and with stress orientation,
sidered in erodibility assessment. It is possible that and is defined by test conditions. No standard soil
predictive capacity could be increased by incorpora- strength test is really suitable for soil erosion re-
tion of a wider range of aggregation characteristics. search. Samples for triaxial and direct shear tests are
removed for laboratory testing, with obvious prob-
3.3. Soil consistency and shear strength
lems of fabric disturbance, particularly when stones
Aggregate properties influence many aspects of or roots are present. The vane shear test, which can
erosional response, but do not directly determine be used on soil in situ, is preferable, though accurate
either the evolution of surface coherence or the shear replication of stress conditions is difficult. Many soil
strength of the coherent soil. The most effective erosion studies have used vane shear tests, with
indices for sealing and fabric dynamics are probably blades of varying depth and diameter Že.g., Luk and
Atterberg consistency limits, which empirically de- Hamilton, 1986; Torri et al., 1987; Coote et al.,
fine soil behaviour as a function of changing soil 1988; Brunori et al., 1989; Govers and Loch, 1993;
moisture content. The limits immediately relevant Merz and Bryan, 1993., and the EUROSEM soil
are the cohesion limit: the moisture content at which erosion model still employs torvane measurements as
soil becomes cohesive; the plastic limit at which it a standard index of soil cohesion ŽMorgan et al.,
deforms plastically under stress; and the liquid limit 1998.. Vane tests can give useful data on temporal
at which it flows under defined, moderate stress. The strength variations linked to soil water, but it is
shrinkage limit, below which soil cracks form may difficult to relate strength measurements directly to
also be significant for rill and pipe network genera- interrill shear stress.
tion. Atterberg limits are routinely measured in soil The greatest difficulty with vane testing is to
engineering, but have not been widely used in soil ensure that the soil layer tested is actually the critical
erosion research. An exception is the C5 – 10 ratio zone in soil erosion. In standard tests, the soil depth
which De Ploey and Mucher Ž1981. introduced as an tested is usually at least several centimeters, while on
effective index of sealing susceptibility of Belgian interrills shear stress affects a much thinner soil
loess soils. This is an extension of the standard liquid layer, usually only a few millimeters thick. Stress
limit test that identifies soil behaviour close to satu- conditions in this layer differ from those at depth,
ration. Bryan and De Ploey Ž1983. found that this and, when surface sealing occurs, the soil fabric is
ratio correlated quite well with field behaviour in also completely different from that of the underlying
soil. It is also difficult to measure shear strength over

the very small areas where stress is concentrated,
particularly in hydraulically rough flow, when form
resistance may be dominated by individual aggre-
gates or small protuberances. The layer affected by
shear stress is always saturated when runoff occurs,
but standard instruments cannot measure the very
low values typical of saturated soils accurately. Slat-
tery and Bryan Ž1992b. developed a very sensitive
vane shear instrument with 3.5 mm deep blades and
a specially constructed helicoidal spring to measure
these very low strengths. This instrument accurately
reflected temporal changes in soil strength during
sealing, but measured strength values still substan-
tially exceeded calculated flow shear stress for
demonstrably erosive runoff. A new multi-bladed
vane, with individual blades 1.5 mm in height, used
Fig. 8. Relationships between soil strenth and soil moisture con-
with a modified Wykeham Farrance laboratory vane
tent for the PontypoolrPeel sandy loam Žafter Slattery and Bryan,
shear apparatus with highly sensitive calibrated 1992a. and the Bondhead sandy loam Žafter Merz, 1990..
springs, has now been developed ŽBryan and Kuhn,
2000, under review.. This is more sensitive to subtle
changes in soil strength, than the original instrument,
and experiences considerably less spring fatigue. De- As the surface soil layer directly affected by
spite improved instrumentation, routine direct, reli- erosion is very thin, the frictional component of
able measurements of shear strength in the thin strength is usually assumed to be insignificant. How-
surface soil layer immediately vulnerable to entrain- ever, recently developed instruments including mi-
ment will remain difficult and measured data will crotensiometers, micro time domain reflectometers
provide, at best, an index of actual conditions. and microautomated standpipes have made accurate
The relationship between aggregation, consistency monitoring of soil water conditions at very small
and soil shear strength has never been precisely temporal and spatial scales possible ŽBryan et al.
defined, though shear strength is obviously linked to 1999.. Using these instruments, Bryan and Rockwell
some of the same bonding mechanisms involved in Ž1998. showed that soil water potential, which pri-
aggregation. Both cohesive and frictional strength marily affects frictional strength, strongly influenced
components are strongly influenced by water con- erosion rates in flume experiments. Tests were car-
tent. Except at very low water contents, when bonds ried out over an impermeable flume bed at 10–12
are of molecular length, cohesion is inversely linked cm depth, so that a perched water table invariably
to water content. Effects on friction may be positive developed. In each case, erosion rates increased
or negative, in inverse relationship to soil water sharply immediately the perched water table formed,
potential. Most soils have both cohesive and fric- before positive soil water potential occurred at the
tional components, so the precise response can be surface or flow hydraulics changed measurably. The
complex, but the pattern shown in Fig. 8 appears to precise process linkage is not yet entirely under-
be typical of many cohesive soils, with marked stood, but the results show that any moisture imped-
decline well before saturation. Strength values for ing layer close to the surface can affect erosion
the PontypoolrPeel and the Bondhead sandy loams processes. The most important immediate implica-
are much lower than those measures on the well-ag- tion of these results is that soil erodibility cannot be
gregated, remoulded Guelph silt loam and Font loam assessed by the properties of the surface soil alone.
by Luk and Hamilton Ž1986., but the response pat- Some consideration of the upper soil profile proper-
tern is identical. ties is also essential.
4. Tentoral and spatial change in soil erodibility gates and increases erodibility, but the effect varies
with soil texture, antecedent moisture and rate of
The properties that affect erosion resistance most temperature change ŽMostaghimi et al., 1988.. Rapid
directly all vary significantly over time. On many freezing always causes aggregate breakdown, but
hillslopes, systematic spatial variations also occur Bryan Ž1971b. found that slow temperature drop can
caused by slope shape, aspect or microclimate. These produce ice segregation on ‘‘frost susceptible’’ soils
can produce major differences in erosional response and actually increase aggregate stability. This effect
during rainstorms, as shown by Bryan Ž1996. in tends to disappear with increased freeze–thaw fre-
controlled simulated rainfall flume experiments with quency and Williams Ž1991. showed peak macroag-
the Gobles and Swinton silt loams ŽFig. 9.. The gregate breakdown with four to five freeze–thaw
properties reflect many factors, and some variation is cycles, with coincident increase in microaggregation.
essentially random, with effects that cancel out over The most severe impact on soil erodibility occurs
long time periods. This was recognized when the when an insulating snow cover is thin or absent. In
USLE ‘‘K ’’ factor was defined as a long-term vari- experimental work in southern Ontario, Canada, Pall
able rather than an index of response in specific et al. Ž1982. and Coote et al. Ž1988. found that frost
rainstorm events. However, some variations follow action is a particularly critical factor causing high
predictable trends or cycles and understanding of soil erosion rates during spring thaw. Bryan and
these is important both for physical event-based ero- Rockwell Ž1998. identified the importance of perched
sion models and long-term prediction of hillslope water tables caused by frozen subsoil as a critical
evolution. All the factors influencing these trends or factor in spring rill erosion on sandy loam soils near
cycles are not fully understood, but the most impor- Toronto. Data from agricultural research stations in
tant appear to be frost action, soil water dynamics, the United States generally show maximum K val-
microbial action and organic decomposition. ues immediately after snowmelt, followed by expo-
nential decline to the end of the growing season
4.1. Frost action ŽYoung et al., 1990.. Imeson and Vis Ž1984b. found
a similar pattern with monthly aggregation in forested
Soil erodibility has usually been treated as a and grassland soils in the Luxembourg Ardennes.
constant, but systematic seasonal variations caused
4.2. Soil water conditions
by frost action have long been recognized. Young et
al. Ž1983. noted marked seasonal variations on ero- The single most important control on erosional
sion plots on fallow agricultural soils, and similar response during rainstorms is probably soil water
patterns occur on natural hillslopes. Schumm and and, globally, rainfall variations cause the most
Lusby Ž1963. and Schumm Ž1964., for example, marked seasonal changes in credibility. Soil water
described seasonal changes in surface soil properties, balance profoundly affects soil structural and hy-
and appearance and disappearance of rills on smec- draulic properties and largely determines erosional
tite-rich Mancos shale hillslopes in Colorado, reflect- response ŽCresswell et al., 1992.. Effects are particu-
ing water content changes and frost action in swelling larly marked in arid and semi-arid tropics where both
soils. Bryan and Price Ž1980. described similar pat- rainfall and drying rates are often intense. Very high
terns, with the seasonal obliteration of rills on the erosion rates are frequently observed early in the wet
lacustrine Scarborough Bluffs in Toronto, Canada, season, though it is often difficult to separate the
due to frost action and solifluction. effect of soil properties from those of storm charac-
Frost action is particularly effective in disrupting teristics and reduced vegetation cover. Dangler and
aggregates when exposed soils are subjected in se- El-Swaify Ž1977. found that seasonal credibility dif-
vere winter climates and a considerable amount of ferences in Hawaii were sufficient to require separate
research on the Canadian Prairies has documented wet and dry season K values. The effect of soil
the effects on soil erodibility Že.g., Sillanpaa and water changes on soil erodibility is complex but, as
Webber, 1961; Bisal and Nielsen, 1967; Benoit, discussed above, all the critical soil properties are
1973.. Most commonly frost action disrupts aggre- strongly influenced. Antecedent soil water at the start
Fig. 9. Ža. Relationship between soil moisture content, soil shear strength and erosion response during sequential flume experiments under
simulated rainfall ŽGobles silt loam.. Žb. Relationship between soil moisture content, soil shear strength and erosion response during
sequential flume experiments under simulated rainfall ŽSwinton silt loam..
of rainstorms is particularly important and several ŽBryan, 1973., but some cracking occurs on all
studies Že.g., Grissinger, 1966; Luk, 1985; Rauws cohesive soils. It is maximal on very dry soils, but
and Auzet, 1989; Govers et al., 1990; Truman et al., can occur with even a small drop in moisture con-
1990. have shown the effect of antecedent water tent. There also appears to be a link with aggregate
content on resistance to runoff or splash entrainment. fracture patterns but fractal scaling relationships be-
Govers and Loch Ž1993. and Bryan Ž1996. have tween disintegrating aggregates and cracked surface
reported up to sevenfold and ninefold differences in seals have not yet been fully explained ŽPerfect and
mean sediment concentration between dry and wet Kay, 1991; Young and Crawford, 1991; Preston et
antecedent conditions. These figures can mask com- al., 1997..
plex relationships, however, as antecedent water con- While antecedent soil water content during indi-
tent usually varies significantly on hillslopes, affect- vidual storms is most critical for erosional response,
ing sealing and hydrocompaction processes, as well soil water regime over longer periods also influences
as particle detachability. Aggregate breakdown peaks erodibility. Soulides and Allison Ž1961., Tisdall et
with sudden wetting of dry soils ŽLe Bissonnais et al. Ž1978. and Shiel et al. Ž1988. have all shown that
al., 1989., but soil shear strength typically declines repeated wetting–drying cycles cause progressive
progressively as water content increases. The net decline in aggregate stability, while Utomo and Dex-
effects can be complex and vary significantly be- ter Ž1982. reported a more complex response with
tween different soils. Most commonly soil erodibility both increased and decreased stability. Stability in
increases with rainfall duration, but the reverse can undisturbed soils invariably declined, but in tilled
also occur. The latter effect is usually attributed to soils it increased for some days after tillage before
surface structural sealing ŽDe Ploey, 1981; Govers, declining. The short term influence of antecedent
1991., but we have also observed another very subtle water in individual rainstorms is believed to be
form of sealing during flume experiments under almost entirely physical, but the long term effects of
simulated rainfall. This can occur under sheet or repeated wetting–drying cycles may involve both
rillwash where raindrop impact is reduced, and can physical and organic effects. Organic effects, includ-
obstruct rill incision. This is neither a structural nor a ing both microbial action and complex decomposi-
depositional seal, but appears to form by plastic tion of organic matter, can profoundly affect aggre-
deformation of clay-rich soils, particularly vertisols, gation characteristics, but Utomo and Dexter’s Ž1982.
in shallow flows that are sufficiently deep to limit results occurred with both non-sterile and sterile
raindrop impact, but which do not produce threshold soils, and were attributed primarily to microcracking
hydraulic conditions for entrainment of cohesive due to shrinkage.
soils. The soil water regime is strongly influenced by
While a lot of attention has been paid to the rainfall patterns, and also by soil water retention
progressive change in soil properties during the wet- characteristics, which should therefore be incorpo-
ting cycle, potentially equally important changes dur- rated in assessment of temporal variations in soil
ing the drying cycle have been largely ignored. erodibility. The standard laboratory technique tests
Particularly significant is ‘‘hard-setting’’ of aggre- very small disturbed samples which have been passed
gates weakened or disrupted during wetting into a through a 2-mm sieve in porous plate vacuum appa-
hard, structured mass during drying ŽMullins and ratus. These data are very relevant to the behaviour
Lei, 1995.. Desiccation cracking can also determine of agricultural soils, particularly seed beds, but as
partitioning of flow between rills and pipes ŽBryan, natural structure and macroporosity is eliminated in
1996. and strongly influence rill network develop- these tests, they do not really provide useful informa-
ment. Rill incision is critical, affecting lower layers tion for hillslope geomorphology and hydrology.
of different moisture content, strength and bulk den- There is clearly a need for a more appropriate test,
sity and producing varied time-dependent changes in which uses much larger block or in situ samples, in
sediment concentration ŽGovers and Loch, 1993.. which macroporosity is intact, and the effect of
Fundamental controls of cracking behaviour are not profile layers of low permeability can also be identi-
yet well-understood. Clay mineralogy is important fied.
Frost action and soil water variations strongly such as polysaccharides, produced and decomposed
affect soil physical conditions, and certainly con- rapidly; temporary agents such as thin roots and
tribute strongly to temporal change in erodibility. fungal hyphae, developed over weeks or months and
However, interpretation of changes in purely climatic decomposing over months to years; and persistent
terms is difficult because disturbed soils can also agents such as strongly sorbed polymers which form
undergo progressive change, referred to as age- slowly as end-products of organic fractionation, and
hardening, curing or thixotropy, without frost action persist over several thousand years. Typical accumu-
or water content fluctuations ŽUtomo and Dexter, lation and decay patterns and relationship to aggrega-
1981.. These changes have been attributed to pro- tion are shown schematically in Fig. 10.
gressive particle re-orientation with creation of new Proportions of organic binding agents vary with
bonds and strengthening of old bonds. Dexter et al. the amount, nature and location of organic inputs,
Ž1988. suggested that age-hardening reflects com- and with time-dependent decomposition and frac-
pression of the diffuse double layer with changes in tionation processes. Inputs are largely controlled by
electrolyte concentration or changes in the pH at vegetation conditions and dynamics. They may be
which net charge on colloidal particles is zero as the strongly seasonal and localized, as with leaf-fall in
main bonding factor. In experiments with Australian, temperate forests, or more continuous and dispersed
Israeli and American soils, Dexter et al. Ž1988. throughout the soil, as in grasslands. Decomposition
showed that age-hardening causes up to fourfold and fractionation depend on microbial activity, which
increases in soil penetration strength over periods of in turn depends on microclimate, particularly as it
50 days. The effect of these changes on soil erodibil- affects soil moisture, temperature and aeration. In-
ity has not been examined, but could be very com- evitably the amount and composition of soil organic
plex. Increased hardness linked with reduced pore matter vary greatly, but under undisturbed conditions
size would probably reduce aggregate size and en- they reach an equilibrium level which, at any loca-
trainment resistance, but could also increase resis- tion, may remain fairly constant or fluctuate through
tance to breakdown, and therefore reduce the possi- predictable seasonal, annual or multi-annual cycles.
bility of surface sealing. While shear strength and The net effect is to produce ‘‘characteristic’’ tempo-
penetration resistance are not identical, increased ral aggregation patterns for natural, undisturbed soils,
shear strength with direct effects on both splash and with specific proportions of macro and microaggre-
runoff resistance would be expected. gates. Temporal variation in aggregation character-
istics may be minimal, or highly significant, depend-
ing on vegetation and climate dynamics and is typi-
4.3. Soil organic matter and microorganisms cally largest in arid and semi-arid regions, where
vegetation is patchy and biomass production and
Soil erosion response is strongly influenced by microbial activity are highly opportunistic. Lavee et
antecedent soil water content and the recent history al. Ž1996, 1998. have shown such fluctuations along
of exposure to physical stresses such as tillage, frost a bioclimatic gradient from the Judaean Hills to the
action and wetting–drying cycles. These short-term Dead Sea, in Israel, with minimum aggregate stabil-
physical stresses are primarily effective in disrupting ity at all locations in March, and maximum seasonal
macroaggregates. Response is also affected by long- variation on stability in intermediate moisture zones.
term trends that reflect the effect of organic matter Natural soil aggregation behaviour has some
and microorganisms on aggregation, as shown in the analogies to the stability and resilience of plants and
Tisdall and Oades model. These long-term trends plant communities. Natural aggregation can be
govern the relative proportions of macro and mi- strongly affected by human activity. Some soils,
croaggregates, which depend on the amount and particularly those that are highly flocculated or rich
activity of various organic binding agents present. in stable humic acids, can withstand considerable
Gabriels and Michiels Ž1991. distinguished three cat- stresses that disrupt or eliminate aggregation in less
egories of organic binding agents: transient agents stable or resilient soils. The stresses linked to human
Fig. 10. Conceptual diagram showing relationships between input of organic matter to soil decomposition and fractionation of organic
matter and soil aggregation.
activity typically involve vegetation change, alter- Recognition of the linkage of characteristic aggre-
ation of organic inputs, and physical disruption of gation patterns to organic matter dynamics suggests
the soil, which transforms soil climate and organic a possible new approach for modelling and predic-
decomposition rates. While human activity is by far tion of soil erodibility. With a few exceptions, undis-
the most dominant cause of disruption, natural occur- turbed soils are almost entirely aggregated, with
rences such as forest fire ŽTernan and Neller, 1999. either specific proportions of macro and microaggre-
or animal trampling can also significantly change gates, or proportions fluctuating within identifiable
aggregation characteristics by, for example, reducing ranges. Macroaggregates are generally less stable
organic material or precipitating hydrophobic sub- and resistant to entrainment, and experience most
stances which temporarily ‘‘water-proof’’ aggre- disruption during rainstorms, so their proportion
gates. The effects of human disruption can include should provide a direct index of potential erodibility.
short-term increases in macroaggregation due to ad- This proportion will decline during a given rain-
dition of manures, but probably the most common storm, and, depending on storm intensity and dura-
and important effect is the exposure by tillage of tion, may be eliminated entirely. Soil erodibility in
organic material formerly protected in almost anaer- ensuing storms would be reduced, unless macroag-
obic conditions in microaggregates to active decom- gregate proportions are restored by organic incorpo-
position. Human activity and particularly intensive ration, microbial activity or physical agents. Where
agriculture, almost inevitably result in long-term re- the timing of organic inputs, the intensity of physical
duction of soil organic matter, and particularly the disruption can be predicted, and the controls on
persistent binding agents. While documentary evi- microbial activity are understood, it should be possi-
dence is scant, reduction in persistent binding agents ble to predict the period necessary for restoration
would become particularly apparent in declining mi- could be forecast, and the progressive effect on soil
croaggregate content. erodibility.
5. Conclusions nent examples. These have generated many impor-

tant research projects and much insight into the
Resistance to erosive forces is primarily deter- nature of erosional processes, though the body of
mined by soil properties, which are therefore critical precise experimental data is still dominated by stud-
in determining spatial and temporal patterns of sedi- ies of disturbed agricultural soils, and particularly
ment transport on hillslopes, thereby affecting not sandy or loamy soils. There are still major gaps in
only hillslope evolution, but sediment delivery pat- our understanding of the behaviour of natural soils,
terns in drainage basins at all scales. The importance including particularly stoney soils on steep slopes, or
of soil properties has been recognized since the soils under natural undisturbed vegetation, where
earliest days of erosion research, but it was originally structural characteristics differ greatly from those of
thought that soil erodibility was an essentially con- agricultural soils. EUROSEM has started to incorpo-
stant characteristic that could be accurately identified rate some of the extensive research carried out on
by one or two easily measurable soil properties. stoney soils carried out in Europe during the past
While a slightly more complex understanding of decade Že.g., Poesen et al., 1994. but the WEPP
variations in soil erodibility emerged as a result of model is still strongly oriented towards agricultural
early soil erosion research, it was essentially this soils. It is still too early to judge the performance of
concept of a constant soil erodibility or ‘‘K ’’ factor these physically based models, most of which are in
which was incorporated in the influential Universal an early stage of development. However, it is clear
Soil Loss Equation. It is clear, in the light of much that a major limitation will be the availability of the
related research over the last several decades that necessary abundant, sophisticated data. While more
this concept is highly simplistic and obsolete, and extensive testing is clearly required, the initial results
that soil erodibility is not a single, simply identified for the WEPP model, in existence for a decade, have
property, but is more appropriately regarded as the been somewhat disappointing, in terms of more ef-
summation of a highly complex response pattern, fective prediction than the USLE.
strongly influenced by intrinsic soil characteristics The preoccupation with development of physi-
and extrinsic, macroenvironmental variables. cally based models has been important in generating
The USLE was designed as a practical tool to research, particularly during the last decade, but it is
assist in agricultural management and has been quite not clear that such models will ultimately be really
successful for guiding land management practices, effective in predicting soil erosion response, particu-
particularly when used in the region where the origi- larly in geomorphologically context. While comput-
nal data were acquired. It is a purely empirical tool ing capacity is a rapidly declining constraint, the
derived from observations on disturbed agricultural abundance and sophistication of the field data neces-
soils on very gentle slopes, which was never in- sary to run even relatively simple models is daunt-
tended for application to the more complex soils and ing, particularly when spatial variability and tempo-
slopes which are typically of interest in geomorphol- ral dynamics are considered. These would need to be
ogy and hydrology. It was also designed to identify greatly expanded and increased in precision to en-
long-term patterns and trends and was not intended compass many of the complex relationships dis-
to provide the spatially and temporally discrete infor- cussed in this paper. In any case, it is not yet clear
mation required for event-based predictive mod- that all the processes and interactions involved in
elling. In the light of these limited objectives, the use soil erodibility can be physically modelled. The com-
of a very simplistic K factor was not a critical flaw. plexity of, for example the microbial, physical,
Attempts to expand the use of the USLE and to chemical and microclimatic factors which determine
extrapolate from the original data to very different soil aggregation patterns, may well be more suited to
environmental circumstances lead to clear recogni- stochastic modelling. Dunne Ž1991. and Benda and
tion of its limitations, and to many recent attempts to Dunne Ž1997. applied stochastic modelling to hills-
develop more effective physically based alternatives, lope evolution in Kenya dominated by splash and
of which the WEPP model in the United States and rainflow, and to drainage basins in the Pacific north-
the EUROSEM model in Europe are recent promi- west United States, dominated by periodic landslid-
ing. These applications were based primarily on the Acknowledgements

stochastic properties of rainfall as the dominant fac-
tor. This paper shows that critical soil properties Much of the research discussed in this paper has
such as aggregation, which affect erosional response been supported by grants from the Natural Sciences
by influencing the distribution of erosive forces, or and Engineering Research Council, Canada, which
soil resistance, also have characteristic probability are gratefully acknowledged. Numerous friends and
distributions. Once probability distributions of criti- colleagues have assisted me in experiments and with
cal factors are adequately defined, it should be possi- ideas, but bear no responsibility for any errors. I am
ble to combine these with stochastic rainfall charac- particularly indebted to Ross Sutherland, Dirk Oost-
teristics for better site-specific, temporally dynamic woud, Mike Slattery, Richard Hawke, Alex Brunton,
prediction of erodibility. It is clear that definition and Erik Brun and Niklaus Kuhn. I would also like to
prediction of erodibility cannot be separated from pay tribute particularly to my former student and
understanding of the controls on sediment transport colleague, Shiu Luk, who made numerous important
and deposition across hillslopes. Accordingly, tem- contributions to soil erosion research, and whose
porally dynamic models of soil resistance will have career was tragically abbreviated by illness.
to be coupled with appropriate sediment transport
routing models, in which the transition from interrill
to rill or piping processes will be extremely critical.
This transition and the subsequent evolution of rill References
and pipe networks may also involve stochastic ele-
ments as suggested by Moore and Foster Ž1990.. Abrahams, A.D., Parsons, A.J., 1991. Resistance to overland flow
However, the probability characteristics of rill and on desert pavement and its implications for sediment transport
pipe network development have received very little modelling. Water Resour. Res. 27 Ž8., 1827–1836.
detailed study, and must remain a high priority for Abrahams, A.D., Parsons, A.J., Luk, S.-H., 1986. Resistance to
future research. overland flow on desert hillslopes. J. Hydrol. 88, 343–363.
Abrahams, A.D., Parsons, A.J., Luk, S.H., 1989. Distribution of
overland flow on desert hillslopes and its implications for
modelling soil erosion. J. Hydrol. 106, 177–184.
6. List of symbols Abrahams, A.D., Li, G., Parsons, A.J., 1996. Rill hydraulics on a
semiarid hillslope, southern Arizona. Earth Surface Processes
uU shear velocity Landforms 21, 35–47.
Adams, J.E., Kirkham, D., Scholtes, W.H., 1958. Soil erodibility
w stream power and other physical properties of some Iowa soils. Iowa State
y unit stream power Coll. J. Sci. 32, 485–540.
f angle of internal friction Ahn, P.M., 1979. Microaggregation in tropical soils: its measure-
z normal stress ment and effects on the maintenance of soil productivity. In:
c cohesion Lai, R., Greenland, D.J. ŽEds.., Soil Physical Properties and
Crop Production in the Tropics. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 75–86.
ss shear strength Andre, J.E., Anderson, H.W., 1961. Variation of soil erodibility
Fr Froude number with geology, geographic zone, elevation and vegetation type
Re Reynolds number in northern Californian wildlands. J. Geophys. Res. 66, 3351–
n fluid viscosity 3358.
p fluid density Arshad, M.A., Mermut, A.R., 1988. Micromorphological and
physico-chemical characteristics of soil crust types in north-
Os sediment concentration western Alberta, Canada. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52, 724–729.
q water discharge Assouline, S., Mualem, Y., 1997. Modelling the dynamics of seal
t shear stress formation and its effect on infiltration. Water Resour. Res. 33,
d median drop diameter 1527–1536.
u flow velocity Bagnold, R.A., 1960. Sediment discharge and stream power, a
preliminary announcement. U. S. Geol. Surv., 421.
g gravitational acceleration Benda, L., Dunne, T., 1997. Stochastic forcing of sediment supply
R hydraulic radius to channel networks from landsliding and debris flow. Water
S slope Resour. Res. 33 Ž12., 2849–2863.
Bennett, H.H., 1926. Some comparisons of the properties of significance of tunnel erosion in a semiarid ephemeral drainage
humid tropical and humid temperate American soils, with system. Geogr. Ann. 67A, 257–273.
special reference to indicated relationships between chemical Bryan, R.B., Hodges, W.K., 1984. Runoff and sediment transport
composition and physical properties. Soil Sci. 21, 349–375. dynamics in Canadian badland microcatchments. In: Walling,
Benoit, G.R., 1973. Effect of freeze–thaw cycles on aggregate D.E., Burt, T.P. ŽEds.., Catchment Experiments in Geomor-
stability and hydraulic conductivity of three soil aggregate phology. GeoBooks, Norwich, pp. 115–132.
sizes. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 37, 3–5. Bryan, R.B., Jones, J.A.A., 1997. The significance of soil piping
Best, J.L., 1988. Sediment transport and bed morphology at river processes: inventory and prospect. Geomorphology 20, 209–
channel confluences. Sedimentology 35, 481–498. 218.
Bisal, F., Nielsen, K.F., 1967. Effect of frost action on the size of Bryan, R.B., Kuhn, N., 2000. A sensitive vane shear apparatus for
soil aggregates. Soil Sci. 104, 268–272. determination of soil shear strength in erosion studies. Soil
Bouyoucos, G.J., 1935. The clay ratio as a criterion of the Sci. Soc. Am., Žsubmitted manuscript..
susceptibility of soils to erosion. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 27, Bryan, R.B., Oostwoud Wijdenes, D., 1992. Field and laboratory
738–741. experiments on the evolution of microsteps and scour channels
Bradford, J., Remley, P., Ferris, J., Santini, J., 1986. Effect of soil on low-angle slopes. Catena 23, 133–161, Supp. Bd.
surface sealing on splash from a single waterdrop. Soil Sci. Bryan, R.B., Poesen, J.W.A., 1989. Laboratory experiments on
Soc. Am. J. 50, 1547–1552. the influence of slope length on runoff, percolation and rill
Brunori, F., Penzo, M.C., Torri, D., 1989. Soil shear strength: its development. Earth Surface Processes Landforms 14, 211–231.
measurement and soil detachability. Catena 16, 59–71. Bryan, R.B., Price, A.G., 1980. Recession of the Scarborough
Brunton, D.A., Bryan, R.B., 2000. Rill network development and Bluffs, Ontario. Z. Geomorphol. 21, 138–150, Supp. Bd.
sediment budgets. Earth Surface Processes Landforms, Žsub- Bryan, R.B., Rockwell, D.L., 1998. Water table control on rill
mitted manuscript.. initiation and implications for erosional response. Geomor-
Bryan, R.B., 1968. The development, use and efficiency of indices phology 23, 151–169.
of soil erodibility. Geoderma 2, 5–26. Bryan, R.B., Yair, A., Hodges, W.K., 1978. Factors controlling
Bryan, R.B., 1969. The relative erodibility of soils developed in the initiation of runoff and piping in Dinosaur Provincial Park
the Peak District of Derbyshire. Geogr. Ann. 51A, 145–159. Badlands, Alberta, Canada. Z. Geomorphol. 34, 48–62, Supp.
Bryan, R.B., 1971a. The efficiency of aggregation indices in the Bd.
comparison of some English and Canadian soils. J. Soil Sci. Bryan, R.B., Imeson, A.C., Campbell, I.A., 1983. Solute release
22, 166–178. and sediment entrainment on microcatchments in the Dinosaur
Bryan, R.B., 1971b. The influence of frost action on soil aggre- Badlands, Alberta, Canada. J. Hydrol. 71, 79–106.
gate stability. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 54, 71–85. Bryan, R.B., Hawke, R.M., Rockwell, D.L., 1998. The influence
Bryan, R.B., 1973. Surface crusts formed under simulated rainfall of subsurface moisture on rill system initiation. Earth Surface
on Canadian soils. C.N.R. Pisa, Conferenze 2, 1–30. Processes Landforms 23, 773–789.
Bryan, R.B., 1974. Water erosion by splash and wash and the Bryan, R.B., Hawke, R.M., Rockwell, D.L., 1999. An automated
erodibility of Albertan soils. Geogr. Ann. 59A, 49–65. microstandpipe System for soil erosion research. Soil Sci. Soc.
Bryan, R.B., 1981. Soil erosion under simulated rainfall in the Am. J. 63, 977–987.
field and laboratory: variability of erosion under controlled Callebaut, F., Gabriels, D., De Boodt, M. ŽEds.., Assessment of
conditions. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Publ. 133, 391–404. Soil Sealing and Crusting. State University of Ghent, Belgium.
Bryan, R.B., 1987. Processes and significance of rill erosion. Chisci, G., Sfalanga, M., Torri, D., 1985. An experimental model
Catena 8, 1–16, Supp. Bd. for evaluating soil erosion on a single-rainstorm basis. In: El
Bryan, R.B., 1990. Knickpoint evolution in rillwash. Catena 17, Swaify, S.A., Moldenhauer, W.C., Lo, A. ŽEds.., Soil Erosion
111–132, Supp. Bd. and Conservation, Soil Conservation of America. Ankeny,
Bryan, R.B., 1991. Surface wash processes. In: Slaymaker, O. Iowa, pp. 558–565.
ŽEd.., Field Experiments and Measurement Programs in Geo- Chorley, R.J., 1959. The geomorphic significance of Oxford soils.
morphology. Balkema and UBC Press, Vancouver, pp. 107– Am. J. Sci.
169. Coote, R., Malcolm-Govem, A., Wall, G.J., Dickinson, W.T.,
Bryan, R.B., 1996. Erosional response to variations in interstorm Rudra, R.P., 1988. Seasonal variation in soil erodibility in-
weathering conditions. In: Anderson, M.G., Brooks, S.A. dices based on shear strength and aggregate stability in some
ŽEds.., Advances in Hillslope Processes. Wiley, Chichester, Ontario soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 68, 405–416.
pp. 589–612. Cresswell, H.P., Smiles, D.E., Williams, J., 1992. Soil structure,
Bryan, R.B., Brun, S.E., 1999. Sequential scour and development soil hydraulic properties and the soil water balance. Aust. J.
of banded vegetation. Catena 37, 147–163. Soil Res. 30, 265–283.
Bryan, R.B., De Ploey, J., 1983. Comparability of soil erosion Dangler, E.W., El-Swaify, S.A., 1977. Erosion of selected Hawaii
measurements with different laboratory rainfall simulators. soils by simulated rainfall. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 769–773.
Catena 4, 33–57, Supp. Bd. De Ploey, J., 1971. Liquefaction and rainwash erosion. Z. Geo-
Bryan, R.B., Harvey, L.E., 1985. Observations on the geomorphic morphol. 15, 491–496, Supp. Bd.
De Ploey, J., 1972. A quantitative comparison between rainfall characteristics of rills. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 33, 1900–
erosion capacity in a tropical and a middle-latitude region. 1906.
Geographical Polonica 23, 141–150. Gilman, K., Newson, M.D., 1980. Soil Pipes and Pipeflow: a
De Ploey, J., 1981. Crusting and time-dependent rainwash mecha- Hydrological Study in Upland Wales. Br. Geomorphol. Res.
nisms on loamy soils. In: Morgan, R.P.C. ŽEd.., Soil Conser- Group Mono. 1, Geobooks, Norwich.
vation. Problems and Prospects. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 139– Govers, G., 1985. Selectivity and transport capacity of thin layer
152. flows in relation to rill generation. Catena 12, 35–49.
De Ploey, J., 1983. Runoff and rill generation on sandy and loamy Govers, G., 1987. Spatial and temporal variability in rill develop-
topsoils. Z. Geomorphol. 46, 15–23, Supp. Bd. ment processes at the Huldenberg experimental site. Catena 8,
De Ploey, J., Mucher, H.J., 1981. A consistency index and 17–34, Supp. Bd.
rainwash mechanisms on Belgian loamy soils. Earth Surface Govers, G., 1991. Time-dependency of runoff velocity and ero-
Processes Landforms 6, 319–330. sion: the effect of the initial soil moisture profile. Earth
De Ploey, J., Poesen, J., 1985. Aggregate stability, runoff genera- Surface Processes Landforms 16, 713–729.
tion and interrill erosion. In: Richards, K.S., Arnett, R.R., Govers, G., Loch, R.J., 1993. Effects of initial water content and
Ellis, S. ŽEds.., Geomorphology and Soils. George Allen and soil mechanical strength on the runoff erosion resistance of
Unwin, London, pp. 99–120. clay soils. Aust. J. Soil Res. 31, 549–566.
De Ploey, J., Savat, J., 1968. Contribution a l’etude de l’erosion Govers, G., Rauws, G., 1986. Transporting capacity of overland
par le splash. Z. Geomorphol. 12, 174–193. flow on plane and irregular beds. Earth Surface Processes
Dexter, A.R., Horn, R., Kemper, W.D., 1988. Two mechanisms Landforms 11, 515–524.
for age-hardening of soil. J. Soil Sci. 39, 163–175. Govers, G., Everaert, W., Poesen, J., Rauws, G., De Ploey, J.,
Dunne, T., 1990. Hydrology, mechanics and geomorphic implica- Lautridou, J.P., 1990. A long flume study of the dynamic
tions of erosion by subsurface flow. In: Higgins, C.G., Coates, factors affecting the resistance of a loamy soil to concentrated
D.R. ŽEds.., Groundwater Geomorphology: the Role of Sub- flow erosion. Earth Surface Processes Landforms 15, 313–328.
surface Water in Earth Processes and Landforms. Geol. Soc. Grissinger, E.H., 1966. Resistance of selected clay systems to
Am., Spec. Pap. 252, pp. 1–28. erosion by water. Water Resour. Res. 2, 131–138.
Dunne, T., 1991. Stochastic aspects of the relations between Guy, B.T., Dickinson, W.T., Rudra, R.P., 1987. The roles of
climate, hydrology and landform evolution. Trans. Jpn. Geo- rainfall and runoff in the sediment transport capacity of inter-
morphol. Union 12 Ž1., 1–24. rill flow. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., 1–35, Paper 86-2537.
Dunne, T., Aubry, B.F., 1986. Evaluation of Horton’s theory of Harris, R.F., Chesters, G., Allen, O.N., 1966. Dynamics of soil
sheetwash and rill erosion on the basis of field experiments. aggregation. Advances in Agronomy 18, 107–169.
In: Abrahams, A.D. ŽEd.., Hillslope Processes. Allen and ¨
Helming, K., Romkens, M.J.M., Prasad, S.N., 1998. Roughness
Unwin, Boston, pp. 31–53. and scaling effect on soil loss and infiltration on a low slope.
Dunne, T., Dietrich, W.E., 1980. Experimental study of Horton Advances in Geoecology 31, 589–595.
overland flow: II. Hydraulic characteristics and hillslope hy- Groundwater Geomorphology: the Role of Subsurface Water in
drographs. Z. Geomorphol. 35, 60–80, Supp. Bd. Earth Processes and Landforms. Higgins, C.G., Coates, D.R.
Emmett, W.W., 1970. The hydraulics of overland flow on hill- ŽEds.., Geol. Soc. Am., Spec. Pap. p. 252.
slopes. U. S. Geol. Prof. Pap., 662–664. Hjulstrom, F., 1935. Studies of the morphological activity of
Farenhorst, A., Bryan, R.B., 1995. Particle size distribution of rivers as illustrated by the River Fyris. Geol. Inst. 25, 221–527,
sediment transported by shallow flow. Catena 25, 47–62. University of Uppsala, Bull.
Farres, P.J., 1978. The role of time and aggregate size in the Hodges, W.K., 1982. Hydraulic characteristics of a badland
crusting process. Earth Surface Processes 3, 243–254. pseudo-pediment slope slope system during simulated rain-
Gabriels, D., Michiels, P., 1991. Soil organic matter and water storm experiments. In: Bryan, R.B., Yair, A. ŽEds.., Badland
erosion processes. In: Wilson, W.S. ŽEd.., Advances in Soil Geomorphology and Piping. Geo Abstracts, Norwich, pp.
Organic Matter Research: The Impact on Agriculture and the 127–152.
Environment. The Royal Chemical Society, Cambridge, pp. Horn, R., 1988. Compressibility of arable land. In: Drescher, J.,
141–152. Horn, R., DeBoodt, M. ŽEds.., Impact of Water and External
Gerits, J.J.P., Imeson, A.C., Verstraten, J.M., Bryan, R.B., 1987. Forces on Soil Structure. Catena 11, pp. 53–71, Supp. Bd.
Rill development and badland regolith properties. Catena 8, Horn, R., 1994. Stress transmission and recompaction in tilled and
141–160, Supp. Bd. segmently disturbed soils under trafficking. Adv. Soil Sci. 11,
Gerits, J.J.P., DeLima, J.L.M.P., Van Den Broek, T.M.W., 1990. 53–87.
Overland flow and erosion. In: Anderson, M.G., Burt, T.P. Horn, R., Taubner, H., Wutke, M., Baumgartl, T., 1994. Soil
ŽEds.., Process Studies in Hillslope Hydrology. Wiley, Chich- physical properties in processes related to soil structure. Soil
ester, pp. 173–214. Tillage Res. 30, 187–216.
Ghadiri, H., Payne, D., 1981. Raindrop impact stress. J. Soil Sci. Horton, R.E., 1938. Rain wave-trains. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union
32, 41–49. 19, 368–374.
Gilley, J.E., Kottwitz, E.R., Simanton, J.R., 1990. Hydraulic Horton, R.E., 1945. Erosional development of streams and their
drainage basins: hydrophysical approach to quantitative mor- soil crustability and erodibility: I. Theory and methodology.
phology. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 56, 370–375. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 47, 425–437.
Hornton, R.E., Leach, H.R., Van Vliet, R., 1934. Laminar sheet- Le Bissonnais, Y., Bruand, A., Jamagne, M., 1989. Laboratory
flow. Am. Geophys. Union Trans. 2, 393–404. experimental study of soil crusting: relations between aggre-
Howard, A.D., McLane, C.F., 1988. Erosion of cohesionless gate breakdown mechanisms and crust structure. Catena 16,
sediment by groundwater sapping. Water Resour. Res. 24, 377–392.
1659–1674. Loch, R.J., 1994. A method for measuring aggregate water stabil-
Imeson, A.C., Vis, R., 1984a. Assessing soil aggregate stability by ity of dryland soils with relevance to surface seal develop-
water-drop impact. Geoderma 34, 185–200. ment. Aust. J. Soil Res. 32, 687–700.
Imeson, A.C., Vis, R., 1984b. Seasonal variations in soil erodibil- Loch, R.J., Foley, J.L., 1994. Measurement of aggregate break-
ity under different land-use types in Luxembourg. J. Soil Sci. down under rain: comparison with tests of water stability and
35, 323–331. relationships with field measurements of infiltration. Aust. J.
Ishihara, T., Iwagaki, Y., Ishihara, Y., 1953. On the rollwave-trains Soil Res. 32, 701–720.
appearing in the water flow on steep slope surface. Memoirs Luk, S.-H., 1979. Effects of soil properties on erosion by wash
of the Faculty of Engineering, Kyoto University 14, 83–91. and splash. Earth Surface Processes 4, 241–255.
Iverson, R.M., Major, J.J., 1986. Groundwater seepage vectors Luk, S.-H., 1985. Effect of antecedent soil moisture content on
and the potential for hillslope failure and debris flow mobiliza- rainwash erosion. Catena 12, 129–139.
tion. Water Resour. Res. 22, 1543–1548. Luk, S.-H., Hamilton, H., 1986. Experimental effects of an-
Jones, J.A.A., 1981. The nature of soil piping — a review of tecedent moisture and soil strength on rainwash erosion of two
research. Br. Geomorphol. Res. Group, Res. Mono 3, Geo luvisols. Geoderma 37, 29–43.
Abstracts, Norwich. Luk, S.H., Chen, H., Cai, Q.G., Jia, Z.J., 1989. Spatial and
Karcz, I., Kersey, D., 1980. Experimental study of free-surface temporal variations in the strength of loess soils, Lishi, China.
flow instability and bedforms in shallow flows. Sediment. Geoderma 45, 303–317.
Geol. 27, 263–300. McIntyre, D.S., 1958a. Permeability measurements for soil crusts
Kashiwaya, K., 1978. On the rill net in a slope system. Bull. formed by raindrop impact. Soil. Sci. 85, 185–189.
Disaster Prev. Res. Inst., Kyoto Univ. 28, 69–93. McIntyre, D.S., 1958b. Soil splash and the formation of soil crusts
Kinnell, P.I.A., 1985. The influence of flow discharge on sedi- by raindrop impact. Soil Sci. 85, 261–265.
ment concentrations in raindrop induced flow transport. Aust. Merritt, E., 1984. The identification of four stages during microrill
J. Soil Res. 26, 575–582. development. Earth Surface Processes Landforms 9, 493–496.
Kinnell, P.I.A., 1990. Modelling erosion by rain-impacted flow. Merz, W., 1990. Threshold conditions for rill erosion of sandy
In: Bryan, R.B ŽEd.., Soil Erosion: Models and Experiment. loam Brunisols. Unpubl. MSc. Thesis. University of Toronto.
Catena 17, pp. 55–66, Supp. Bd. Merz, W., Bryan, R.B., 1993. Critical conditions for rill initiation
Kwaad, F.J.P.M., Mucher, H.J., 1994. Degradation of soil struc- on sandy loam Brunisols: laboratory and field experiments in
ture by welding — a micromorphological study. Catena 23, southern Ontario, Canada. Geoderma 57, 357–385.
253–268. Meyer, L.D., Foster, G.D., Nikolov, S., 1975. Effect of flow rate
Lal, R., 1990. Soil Erosion in the Tropics: Principles and Manage- and canopy on rill erosion. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 18,
ment. McGraw-Hill, New York. 905–911.
Lane, S.N., Bradbrook, K.F., Richards, K.S., Biron, P.M., Roy, Middleton, H.E., 1930. Properties of soils which influence soil
A.G., 1999. Time-flow structure in the central region of a erosion. U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech., 178.
stream confluence: a discussion. Earth Surface Processes Moore, I.D., 1981. Effect of surface sealing on infiltration. Trans.
Landforms 24, 361–368. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 24, 1546–1552.
Lavee, H., Sarah, P., Imeson, A.C., 1996. Aggregate stability Moore, I.D., Burch, G.J., 1986. Sediment transport capacity of
dynamics as affected by soil temperature and moisture regimes. sheet and rill flow: application of unit stream power theory.
Geogr. Ann. 78A, 73–82. Water Resour. Res. 22, 1350–1360.
Lavee, H., Imeson, A.C., Sarah, P., 1998. The impact of climate Moore, I.D., Foster, G.R., 1990. Hydraulics and overland flow. In:
change on geomorphology and desertification along a Mediter- Anderson, M.G., Burt, T.P. ŽEds.., Process Studies in Hills-
ranean-arid transect. Land Degradation and Development 9, lope Hydrology. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 215–254.
407–422. Morgan, R.P.C., 1986. Soil Erosion and Conservation. Longman,
Laws, J.O., 1941. Measurement of fall velocity of water-drops and Harlow.
raindrops. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 22, 709–721. Morgan, R.P.C., Quinton, J.N., Smith, R.J., Govers, G., Poesen,
Laws, J.O., Parsons, D.A., 1943. The relation of raindrop size to J.W.A., Auerswald, K., Chischi, G., Torri, D., Styczen, M.E.,
intensity. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 24, 452–460. 1998. The European Soil Erosion Model ŽEUROSEM.: a
Le Bissonnais, Y., 1990. Crust micromorphology and runoff dynamic approach for predicting sediment transport from fields
generation on silty soil materials during different seasons. In: and small catchments. Earth Surface Processes Landforms 23,
Bryan, R.B. ŽEd.., Soil Erosion: Experiments and Models. 527–544.
Catena Verlag, Cremlingen, pp. 11–16. Mosley, M.P., 1976. An experimental study of channel conflu-
Le Bissonnais, Y., 1996. Aggregate stability and assessment of ences. J. Geol. 84, 535–562.
Moss, A.J., 1988. The effects of flow-velocity variations on by raindrop splash. Part II. Detachability and transportability
rain-driven transportation and the role of raindrop impact in measurements. Catena 8, 19–41.
the movement of solids. Aust. J. Soil Res. 26, 443–450. Poesen, J.W., Torri, D., Bunte, K., 1994. Effects of rock frag-
Moss, A.J., 1991. Rain impact on soil crusts: I formation on a ments on soil erosion by water at different spatial scales: a
granite-derived soil. Aust. J. Soil Res. 29, 271–289. review. Catena 23, 141–166.
Moss, A.J., Green, P., 1983. Movement of soils in air and water Preston, S., Griffiths, B.S., Young, I.M., 1997. An investigation
by raindrop impact: effects of drop-size and water-depth varia- into sources of crack heterogeneity using fractal geometry.
tions. Aust. J. Soil Res. 21, 443–450. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 48, 31–37.
Moss, A.J., Walker, P.H., Hutka, J., 1979. Raindrop-stimulated Rauws, G., 1987. The initiation of rills on plane beds of non-cohe-
transportation in shallow water flows: an experimental study. sive sediments. Catena 8, 107–118, Supp. Bd.
Sediment. Geol. 22, 165–184. Rauws, G., 1988. Laboratory experiments on resistance to over-
Moss, A.J., Green, P., Hutka, J., 1982. Small channels: their land flow due to composite roughness. J. Hydrol. 103, 37–52.
experimental formation, nature and significance. Earth Surface Rauws, G., Auzet, A.V., 1989. Laboratory experiments on the
Processes Landforms 7, 401–416. effects of simulated wheel trackings on linear soil erosion. Soil
Mostaghimi, S., Young, R.A., Wilts, A.R., Kenimer, A.L., 1988. Tillage Res. 19, 75–81.
Effects of frost action on soil aggregate stability. Trans. Am. Rhoads, B.L., Kenworthy, S.T., 1998. Time-averaged flow struc-
Soc. Agric. Eng. 32, 435–439. ture in the central region of a stream confluence. Earth Surface
Mualem, Y., Assouline, S., Rohdenburg, H., 1990. Rainfall-in- Processes Landforms 23, 171–191.
duced soil seal. A critical review of observations and models. Rhoads, B.L., Kenworthy, S.T., 1999. On secondary circulation,
Catena 17, 185–203. helical motion and Rozovskii-based analysis of time-averaged
Mullins, C.E., Lei, G.J., 1995. Mechanisms and characterization two-dimensional velocity fields at confluences. Earth Surface
of hard-setting soils. In: So, H., Smith, G.D., Paine, S.R., Processes Landforms 24, 369–375.
Schofer, B.M., Loch, R.J. ŽEds.., Sealing, Crusting and Hard- ¨
Romkens, M.J.M., 1985. The soil erodibility factor: a perspective.
setting Soils Productivity and Conservation. ASSI Publication, In: Soil Erosion and Conservation. Soil Conservation Society
pp. 157–176. of America, pp. 445–461, Ankeny.
Mutchler, C.K., Larson, C.L., 1971. Splash amounts from water- ¨
Romkens, M.J.M., Prasad, S.N., Whisler, F.D., 1990. Surface
drop impact on a smooth surface. Water Resour. Res. 7, sealing and infiltration. In: Anderson, M.G., Burt, T.P. ŽEds..,
195–200. Process Studies in Hillslope Hydrology. Wiley, Chichester.
Nearing, M.A., Nortorn, L.D., Bulgakov, D.A., Larionov, G.A., ¨
Romkens, M.J.M., Luk, S., Poesen, J., Mermut, A., 1995. Rainfall
West, L.T., Dontsova, K.M., 1998. Hydraulics and erosion in infiltration into loess soils from different geographic regions.
eroding rills. Water Resour. Res. 33, 865–876. Catena 25, 21–32.
Norton, L.D., 1987. Micromorphological study of surface seals Rose, C.W., 1960. Soil detachment caused by rainfall. Soil Sci.
developed under simulated rainfall. Geoderma 40, 127–140. 89, 28–35.
Oades, J.M., 1993. The role of biology in the formation, stabiliza- Rose, C.W., 1985. Developments in soil erosion and deposition
tion and degradation of soil structure. Geoderma 56, 377–400. models. In: Stewart, B.A. ŽEd.., Adv. Soil Sci.. Springer-
Oades, J.M., Waters, A.G., 1991. Aggregate hierarchy in soils. Verlag, Berlin, pp. 1–64.
Aust. J. Soil Res. 29, 815–824. Rowntree, K.M., 1982. Sediment yields from a laboratory catch-
Pall, R., Dickinson, W.T., Green, D., McGirr, R., 1982. Impact of ment and their relationship to rilling and surface armouring.
soil characteristics on soil erodibility. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Earth Surface Processes Landforms 7, 153–170.
Publ. 137, 39–47. Roy, A.G., Bergeron, N., 1990. Flow particle paths at a natural
Palmer, R.S., 1963. The influence of thin water layer on water river confluence with coarse bed material. Geomorphology 3,
drop impact forces. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Publ. 68, 141–148. 99–112.
Panabooke, C.R., Quirk, J.P., 1957. Effect of initial water content Roy, A.G., Roy, R., Bergeron, N., 1988. Hydraulic geometry and
on stability of soil aggregates in water. Soil Sci. 83, 185–195. changes in flow velocity at a river confluence with coarse bed
Park, S.W., Mitchell, J.K., Bubenzer, G.D., 1982. Splash erosion material. Earth Surface Processes Landforms 13, 583–598.
modelling: physical analysis. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 25, Savat, J., 1976. Discharge velocities and total erosion of a calcare-
357–361. ous loess: a comparison between pluvial and terminal runoff.
Parsons, A.J., Abrahams, A.D., Luk, S.H., 1990. Hydraulics of Revue de Geomorphologie Dynamique 24, 113–122.
interrill overland flow on a semi-arid hillslope southern Ari- Savat, J., 1977. The hydraulics of sheet flow on a smooth surface
zona. J. Hydrol. 117, 255–273. and the effect of simulated rainfall. Earth Surface Processes 2,
Perfect, E., Kay, B.D., 1991. Brittle fracture of fractal cubic 125–140.
aggregates. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 59, 969–974. Savat, J., 1980. Resistance to flow in rough supercritical sheet
Phelps, H.O., 1975. Shallow laminar flows over rough granular flow. Earth Surface Processes 5, 103–122.
surfaces. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., Proc. 101 ŽHY3., 367–384. Savat, J., De Ploey, J., 1982. Sheetwash and till development by
Poesen, J., 1981. Rainwash experiments on the erodibility of loose surface flow. In: Bryan, R.B., Yair, A. ŽEds.., Badland Geo-
sediments. Earth Processes Landforms 6, 285–307. morphology and Piping. Geo Abstracts, Norwich, pp. 113–126.
Poesen, J., Savat, J., 1981. Detachment and transportation of loose Savat, J., Poesen, J., 1981. Detachment and transport of loose
sediments by raindrop splash. Part I. The calculation of abso- the Environment. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cam-
lute data on detachability and transportability. Catena 8, 1–17. bridge, pp. 153–162.
Schumm, S.A., 1956. Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in Ternan, J.L., Neller, R., 1999. The erodibility of soils beneath
badlands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. wildfire prone grasslands in the humid tropics, Hong Kong.
67, 597–646. Catena 36, 49–64.
Schumm, S.A., 1964. Seasonal variations of erosion rates and Tisdall, J.M., 1994. Possible role of soil microorganisms in aggre-
processes on hillslopes in western Colorado. Z. Geomorphol. gation in soil. Plant Soil 159, 115–121.
5, 215–238, Supp. Bd. Tisdall, J.M., Oades, J.M., 1982. Organic matter in water-stable
Schumm, S.A., Lusby, G.C., 1963. Seasonal variations in infiltra- aggregates in soil. J. Soil Sci. 33, 141–163.
tion capacity and runoff on hillslopes of western Colorado. J. Tisdall, J.M., Cockroft, B., Uren, N.C., 1978. The stability of soil
Geophys. Res. 68, 3655–3666. aggregates as affected by organic materials, microbial activity
Schumm, S.A., Mosley, M.P., Weaver, W.E., 1987. Experimental and physical disruption. Aust. J. Soil Res. 16, 9–17.
Fluvial Geomorphology. Wiley-Interscience, New York. Torri, D., Bryan, R.B., 1997. Micropiping processes and biancana
Shen, H.W., Li, R.M., 1973. Rainfall effect on sheet flow over evolution in southeast Tuscany, Italy. Geomorphology 20,
smooth surface. J. Hydraul. Div., ASCE HY5, 771–792. 219–235.
Sheppard, B., Joe, P., 1994. Comparison of raindrop size distribu- Torri, D., Sfalanga, M., Chisci, G., 1987. Threshold conditions for
tion measurements by a Joss-Waldvogel disdrometer, a PMS incipient rilling. Catena 8, 97–107, Supp. Bd.
2DG spectrometer and a POSS doppler radar. J. Atmos. Ocean Torri, D., Colica, A., Rockwell, D., 1994. Preliminary study of the
Tech. 11, 874–887. erosion mechanisms in a biancane badland ŽTuscany, Italy..
Shiel, R.S., Adey, M.A., Lodder, M., 1988. The effect of succes- Catena 23, 281–294.
sive wetrdry cycles on aggregate size distribution in a clay Truman, G.C., Bradford, J.M., Ferris, J.E., 1990. Influence of
texture soil. J. Soil Sci. 39, 71–80. antecedent water content and rainfall energy on soil aggregate
Sillanpaa, M., Webber, L.R., 1961. The effect of freezing–thaw- breakdown. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54, 1385–1392.
ing and wetting–drying cycles on soil aggregation. Can. J. Utomo, A.R., Dexter, A.R., 1981. Age-hardening of agricultural
Soil Sci. 41, 182–187. top soils. J. Soil Sci. 32, 335–350.
Singhal, M.K., Mohan, J., Agrawal, A.K., 1980. Role of grains- Utomo, W.H., Dexter, A.R., 1982. Changes in soil aggregate
hear stress in sediment transport. Irrigation and Power 37, stability induced by wetting and drying cycles in non-saturated
105–108. soil. J. Soil Sci. 33, 623–637.
Slattery, M.C., Bryan, R.B., 1992a. Hydraulic conditions for rill Valentin, C., Bresson, L.M., 1992. Erosional crusts: morphology,
incision under simulated rainfall: a laboratory experiment. genesis and classification of surface crusts in loamy and sandy
Earth Surface Processes Landforms 17, 127–146. soils. Geoderma 55, 225–245.
Slattery, M.C., Bryan, R.B., 1992b. Laboratory experiments on Walker, P.H., Kinnell, P.I.A., Green, P., 1978. Transport of a
surface seal development and its effect on interrill erosion noncohesive sandy mixture in rainfall and runoff experiments.
processes. J. Soil Sci. 43, 517–529. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 42, 793–801.
Slattery, M.C., Bryan, R.B., 1994. Surface seal development Waters, A.G., Oades, J.M., 1991. Organic matter in water-stable
under simulated rainfall on an actively eroding surface. Catena aggregates. In: Wilson, W.S. ŽEd.., Advances in Soil Organic
22, 17–34. Matter Research: The Impact of Agriculture and the Environ-
Smerdon, E.T., 1964. Effect of rainfall on critical tractive forces ment. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, pp. 163–
in channels with shallow flow. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 7, 174.
287–290. Williams, L.R., 1991. The effect of alternate freezing and thawing
Smith, D.D., Wischmeier, W.H., 1962. Rainfall erosion. Advances on aggregate stability and aggregate size distribution of some
in Agronomy 14, 109–148. Prince Edward Island soils. J. Soil Sci. 42, 193–204.
Soulides, D.A., Allison, F.E., 1961. Effect of drying and freezing Yair, A., Bryan, R.B., Lavee, H., Adar, E., 1980. Runoff and
soils on carbon dioxide production, available mineral nutri- erosion processes and rates in the Zin Valley badlands, north-
ents, aggregation and bacterial population. Soil Sci. 91, 291– ern Negev, Israel. Earth Surface Processes 5, 205–225.
298. Yang, C.T., 1973. Incipient motion and sediment transport. J.
Sumner, M.E., 1995. Soil crusting: chemical and physical pro- Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 99 ŽHY10., 1679–1704.
cesses. The view forward from Georgia. In: So, H.B., Smith, Yariv, S., 1976. Comments on the mechanism of soil detachment
G.D., Paine, S.R., Schofer, B.M., Loch, R.J. ŽEds.., Sealing, by rainfall. Geoderma 15, 393–399.
Crusting and Hard-Setting Soils: Productivity and Conserva- Yoder, R.E., 1936. A direct method of aggregate analysis of soils
tion. ASSI Publications. and a study of the physical nature of erosion losses. J. Am.
Sumner, M.E., Stewart, B.A. ŽEds.., Soil Crusting: Chemical and Soc. Agron. 28, 337–351.
Physical Processes. A.S. Lewis, Boca Raton. Yoon, Y.N., Wenzel, H.G., 1971. Mechanics of sheet flow under
Swift, R.S., 1991. Effects of humic substances and polysaccha- simulated rainfall. J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 97
rides on soil aggregation. In: Wilson, W.S. ŽEd.., Advances in ŽHY9., 1367–1386.
Soil Organic Matter Research: The Impact on Agriculture and Young, R.A., 1974. A method of measuring aggregate stability
under waterdrop impact. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 31, Young, R.A., Onstad, C.A., McCool, D.K., Benoit, G.R., 1983.
1351–1354. Temporal changes in soil erodibility. Proc. Natural Resources
Young, I.M., Crawford, J.W., 1991. The fractal structure of soil Modelling Symp., Colorado. ARS 30, Oct. 16–21.
aggregates: its measurement and interpretation. J. Soil Sci. 42, ¨
Young, R.A., Romkens, M.J.M., McCool, D.K., 1990. Temporal
187–192. variations in soil erodibility. Catena 17, 41–53, Supp. Bd.
Young, R.A., Wiersma, J.L., 1973. The role of rainfall impact in
soil detachment and transport. Water Resour. Res. 9, 1629–
1639.

Soil Erodibility and Processes of Water Erosion On Hillslope

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Soil Erodibility and Processes of Water Erosion On Hillslope

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geomorphology 32 Ž2000.

Soil erodibility and processes of water erosion on hillslope

Keywords: soil; erodibility; water erosion

1. Introduction central Importance in geomorphology. In soil-man-

3.2. Aggregation ŽOades, 1993.. They may also be strongly cemented

soil. It is also difficult to measure shear strength over

5. Conclusions nent examples. These have generated many impor-

ing. These applications were based primarily on the Acknowledgements

You might also like